Possible grade on '58 AS Mantle?

[timzcardz]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Nice card. Assuming no surface issues that we can't see, I'd guess in the 6-7 range.

I'd agree with this, except possibly . . .


What are :

The vertical line running between the 2nd and third columns of stars from the left?

The curved line from the "z" in "Magazine" to the intersection of his bat with his back?

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by timzcardz

I'd agree with this, except possibly . . .


What are :

The vertical line running between the 2nd and third columns of stars from the left?

The curved line from the "z" in "Magazine" to the intersection of his bat with his back?

Agreed, which is why I said assuming no surface issues that we can't really determine through a picture. If they are just print issues, the card woud probably still have an outside chance at a 7. Increasingly however, graders are making decisions based on what they see under 10x (and +) loupes, so the reality is it's impossible to tell what the card would grade or even get a good ballpark just from a picture. I have vintage cards that look like 7's that got SGC 5's and 5.5's. On some I still have no clue why.

[mferronibc]

Thanks for the input guys. The lines are both on the plastic case not the card itself. Kinda feel like more likely to be disappointed with a 5-6 than I am to be pleasantly surprised by a 7+. Wouldn’t want to ruin my perception of the card as it is so sentimental to me and unless it was an 8 to “lock in” that kind of value don’t see too much upside to sending it in for now.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by mferronibc

Thanks for the input guys. The lines are both on the plastic case not the card itself. Kinda feel like more likely to be disappointed with a 5-6 than I am to be pleasantly surprised by a 7+. Wouldn’t want to ruin my perception of the card as it is so sentimental to me and unless it was an 8 to “lock in” that kind of value don’t see too much upside to sending it in for now.

Also know that consciously or not, grading companies under-grade Mantle. He's the single most popular player in vintage card collecting and always has been. If that were a '58 All Star of Frank Robinson or Eddie Mathews in the exact same condition, it would be a lot more likely to get a 7 than Mantle. Not fair, but true.

[mferronibc]

Great tip thanks John. Sounds like the problem you ran into with your ‘65 mantle you posted on the other thread. If this did come back a 5 I’d solicit your help breaking it out because looking at that grade every day would just depress me.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by mferronibc

Great tip thanks John. Sounds like the problem you ran into with your ‘65 mantle you posted on the other thread. If this did come back a 5 I’d solicit your help breaking it out because looking at that grade every day would just depress me.

Yeah, but you can't get hung up like that with grading. Technical grade is not the same as eye appeal. Buy the card, not the grade. If you are happy with that card and don't plan to sell it, then no real reason to send it in. I actually pride myself on lower grade cards that look fantastic, because in most cases in means I got a good deal. Check out the thread "Mid-Grade Collectors" in this same forum.

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Yeah, but you can't get hung up like that with grading. Technical grade is not the same as eye appeal. Buy the card, not the grade. If you are happy with that card and don't plan to sell it, then no real reason to send it in. I actually pride myself on lower grade cards that look fantastic, because in most cases in means I got a good deal. Check out the thread "Mid-Grade Collectors" in this same forum.

This. It seems like grading companies exist just to shit on beautiful cards like this one. “Ah, but there are print flaws you can only see under 10x magnification. No points for you!” (evil cackle).

[Tyruscobb]

5.5 or 6 in my lay, humble opinion. Nice card despite the grade it receives. Enjoy it.