Certified, Qualified and Glorified!!!

[JollyElm]

Get 'Em While They're Hot...

The 1961 Topps Mickey Mantle All Star #578 High Number is just a card you 'need' to grab if one becomes available at a relatively decent price in this insane market. The 1963 Topps Juan Marichal #440 is the embodiment of 'meaninglessly' OC cards. Because of the colored bottom borders in that set, when an image is pushed up a bit, it really doesn't matter at all aesthetically, as it may on a white bordered card. The 1967 Topps Willie Mays #200, has an obvious gum stain on back, but 'Sey Hey' cards are on a steep incline, so I felt good about grabbing this one before things get even more batsh*t crazy. And the 1971 Topps andy kosco (sic) #746 is a jet black, sharp cornered high number, so who the heck cares about that 'off' centering...

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Get 'Em While They're Hot...
The 1961 Topps Mickey Mantle All Star #578 High Number is just a card you 'need' to grab if one becomes available at a relatively decent price in this insane market.

Nice pickups, Darren. Totally agreed on the '61 Mantle AS. If there is a sleeper Mantle card, I think that is it. Slick '61 AS design, plus it's a high number. I picked up a nicely centered PSA 5 about three years ago. Not that this thread is about centering, LOL.

[JollyElm]

A stain upon the silence...

The 1959 Topps Luis Aparicio #310 is what I call an "Opportunity Accost" - unexpectedly coming across a card and knowing if you don’t buy it at that price, the next person who sees it will undoubtedly jump on it. It's nicely centered and there are very, very minor (and easily-ignored) gum stains on the back. Before the internet existed, just seeing a 1963 Fleer Checklist was a fantastical experience, the embodiment of rarity. Nowadays, it still holds a great deal of that same magic for many of us. The (air quotes) "off center" 1965 Topps Clete Boyer #475, is an 'ancient' relic I remember from my youth. One of my brother's friends gave us a stack of very old cards (I assumed he gave up collecting so he could learn guitar and start landing chicks??) and a round-cornered Boyer with another Yankee I had never heard of, Tom Tresh (whose name obviously made me laugh), were a part of it. And the 1972 Topps Nolan Ryan #595 is a beautiful looking (read as 'no tilt,' and ignore the Mets uniform with the airbrushed abomination of a hat), quickly escalating card...

[JollyElm]

Overpaid my welcome...

When I bought most of these, the prices might have been considered relatively 'stupid,' but I knew a month later they would look like sweet bargains, so I grabbed up each of them.

The centering on the 1961 Topps Ernie Banks #350 ain't be bothering me none, as there's a decent amount of white space on all four sides. The 1968 Topps 3-D Jim Lonborg is just an awesome rarity to behold. The stain is easily-ignored gum/wax(?) on its blank back. I'll take that qualifier any day of the week. This card is beautiful, and Topps really dropped the ball by not pursuing this avenue of cards. Packs of these guys would've flown off the shelves, the way boxes of Corn Flakes did for Kellogg's instead. The (pretty nicely centered for this card) 1969 Topps Pete Rose #120, is what I call "leggy." If there's a future group sub, I'm going to bust him out and work away the 'invisible' gum/wax with some panty hose for a re-submit. And the 1974 Topps Tom Seaver #80 (somewhat awkward tilt aside) is just one of my all-time favorite cards, showing the grunt-filled follow-through of 'Tom Terrific' at Shea on a sunny day with a capacity crowd cheering him on, probably during my Mets' push to the World Series in 1973 (and the John 'The Hammer' Milner cameo makes my heart smile every time)...

[packs]

When they mark a card PD what's the defect usually?

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by packs

When they mark a card PD what's the defect usually?

Most of the ones I have gotten are centered around too much 'snow' or fish-eyes here and there. Things like that. Pretty minor stuff in most cases, but it is sometimes significant enough to be bothersome to some collectors. Other PDs are just insanely unwarranted to me, like this 1961 Banks MVP I have...

1961banksmvp485front.jpg1961banksmvp485back.jpg

It's either due to the speck of white to the right of his eyes or the tiny bit of black invading the the left corner of the green diamond on back. I just don't get it...but it's still a beautiful card.


Edited to add: other common 'print defects' are things such as print lines, or erroneous color shifts and whatnot.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Other PDs are just insanely unwarranted to me, like this 1961 Banks MVP I have...

PSA was pretty much wildly inconsistent with the PD qualifier at the time they were making flips that looked like that. I would not expect you would get it again today if you cracked that card and resubbed.