Best card grades for the money

[jethrod3]

To a large degree it depends on what issues you are grading. I have seen cards like the minor league 1960 Tacoma Giants issue as well as Jay publishing and team issues come back with very low grades (talking 1, 1.5 or 2) just because the backs or borders have printers marks or spots rather than any real issues that would sink most typical card issues. Yet they can still have glorious eye appeal.

[jchcollins]

For my postwar vintage PC, I usually like to play from the 6 range down to as low as 1.5. We've all seen cards that look bad for the grade, and then the occasional 4 that looks like a 7, and on the other end of that scale - the 1.5 that looks at least VG.

The lower you go, the more variable range you can get in the "technical grade v. eye appeal" department, as I like to think of it. I list as high as 6, because at least with some older PSA slabs, many straight 6's are really 8 (OC)'s that the submitter didn't want a qualifier on. And they can be had for a fraction of the price of a straight 8. 7's and 8's in my experience (yes, I own a few) are great - but you generally get what you pay for in those grades. Those who pay for the grade / flip will shell out for an 8 in many cases that has worse color or something, worse eye appeal than some 6's. This doesn't pass the value sniff test to me.

As always, go for the cards that look wildly undergraded. They are there if you spend enough time looking. I have a '63 Clemente in a 4 that has pack fresh qualities. Under PSA's system a decade or more ago it would have been at least a 5; but it has one corner ding, the rest of the card is at least a nice 6, and the color is almost dripping fresh. No creases, no wrinkles, no other problems other than less than perfect centering, which doesn't bother me. I'll take that all day long for the price I paid for a PSA 4.

PS - I know dealers hate them and I get it, but I love the half grades. It's the grader's nod that, yes, that's a 5, but it's a really good looking 5. How many 5.5's look better than 6's? How many 4.5's look better than 5's? They are out there and sometimes dramatically less than the next half grade up. Remember, technical grading at it's core is NOT commenting on eye appeal. You can take advantage of the discrepancy between the two most in the middle of the scale, not usually at the high end. Sometimes more at the low end. If you care not about backs, I will be able to find you some fantastic looking PSA 1's.

[Kutcher55]

1.5 and 8. Anything centered that is a 1.5 or a 2 and has balanced wear rather than one big ding somewhere…I like that sort of card in older issues.

[Kutcher55]

8s can be pretty dang Cherry and set you back for a fraction of the cost of a 9/10. Someone already made this point and I agree.

[deweyinthehall]

When looking for a 1960s era card (the time frame I'm collecting currently), my first search is for SGC 3.5-5.5 - invariably I find one or more that look to the naked eye like Ex-MT versions, and most of the time at great prices.