1952 Topps Mickey Mantle psa dna, pop 20, signed
mktanaka5
Posts: 7 ✭
There are currently 20 signed 1952 Mickey Mantle Topps cards in psa dna registry. One of the 20 has trail that it was signed in 1968 and traced back to original owner that also had his 1951 Bowman Mantle card signed at same time. Another that just sold at Goldin's had original owner who got the card signed in 1970's. Does anyone own or knows others who got Mantle to sign 1952 Topps Mantle? If so, details why going one went against conventional wisdom at time. With total of 20 signed 1952 Topps Mantle's in psa dna pop report, trying to get details from original owners the timeframe and compelling reasons each got Mickey to signed the iconic 1952 Topps Mantle. For decades, it was frowned upon to get valuable RC signed thus many key RC or iconic cards have such low pops today.
Comments
Signed cards are just like a baby taking a crayon to a card..I HATE SIGNED CARDS….and FROWN on such!! Marked (MK) on the assigned grade…not to mention difficulty of authenticating the signature.
I look at it as embellishing a piece of art with the significance of the depicted athlete’s signature thus multiplying the rarity significantly. I treasure most of all the cards I have curated from pack to slab, obtaining the signature myself.
I’ve heard of the story you mention but have forgotten the details and don’t know who the person was. A coach or something.
While it was frowned upon for a long time, there was always a subset of collectors who loved this form of “marked” cards. It gained popularity in the 80s and 90s but has really blown up the last few years.
There is another factor for why many key cards are lacking autographs. There was a luck factor of having to meet the person, having the card on you, either you or the athlete having a pen and the athlete being willing to sign at that moment. Granted, a lot of players signed autographs on the show circuit in the 1980s and later, but the reason why, for example, so few Jackie Robinson rookie cards are signed is likely related to the above factors rather than the view of desecrating a valuable card. I don't know how many people would have been carrying around cards with the intent of getting them autographed way back when.
Yes. DaVinci signing the Mona Lisa across her chest would be a huge fail.
The difference being that the Mona Lisa is, itself, a unique piece of art. A sports card, even one from the 19th century was volume produced.
I think it’s a fine opinion to have that autographs on a card are undesirable. The reasonable argument is simply that it’s a matter of taste.
But let’s follow through with the Mona Lisa example. With the 52 topps series 2 we think some 300-500 cases were dumped. So let’s ignore what was actually distributed and just consider the cases which ended up in the river. And let’s not even project how many 311s per case. Let’s assume 1. So there are 300 Mona Lisa’s out there. 20 are signed by Davinci. You don’t want one that’s signed?
Ok.
I would prefer a Mona Lisa signed by Mona Lisa. That's the tone of this thread, no?
Bundalay, sahvay.
No…don’t ruin the art piece or cards.
ruin cards with player autograph? please spare me the drama. each has place in hobby... great/perfect cards "pack fresh" as well as signed cards. Mickey Mantle took pride in signing his cards and placement of auto for each card tht would enhance card. (not over his face, dark areas of card, etc) this is not either or debate, both can co exist in hobby and finest pieces can be coveted by all.
Dorothy's ruby red slippers, it is estimated 6 or 7 pairs were on set for filming of Wizard of Oz. One just went for 32m (not signed). Imagine if one of them were signed by Judy Garland on sole. Would that be the most coveted of the 6 or 7 that are known to exist? (none are signed by Judy) I think so.
I would probably pay up the most for the ones that allow you to teleport when you click your heels with a Judy Garland signed pair coming in a close second.
But that’s just me.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
I guess I’ve been doing hobby wrong all these years. I’ll see if my wife can borrow me a magic eraser and I’ll get to work on cleaning these chicken scratches off these cardboard prints.
They hobby for decades frowned upon getting expensive cards signed. 1970's, 80's, 90's, 2000's... Finally in the 2010's, the spring melt began on this topic where signed vintage RC began to get traction. The winter freeze where no or very little qty of signed vintage RC or key cards (1933 Goudey, 1941 Playball, etc) created condition we have today, so few RC and key vintage cards ever have been signed. 1948L, 1949B Jackie, 1933 Goudey Babe and Lou (Uncle Jimmy's collection), 1952 Topps 311, 1939 Ted Playball, 1941 Joe D Playball. Of the 50 or so known cards of Honus T 206, 0 are known to be signed. The spring snow melt is occurring with vintage signed RC and key iconic cards... One can stick their head in sand or open their eyes... Seems simple enough to me.
Historic tickets have same debate of getting historic tickets signed vs leave in un signed state. Again as is case (in my view) cards, both can be enjoyed and collected. It does not have to be either/or. Think of historic tickets (will not mention debut as every player has that)... The Catch/Willie, SB3/Joe Willie, The Ice Bowl/Bart, The Called Shot/Babe, The FB The Catch/Joe, Luckiest Man/Lou, Immaculate Reception/Franco, The Last Shot/MJ, 1968 200 Meters/Tommie Smith, etc
here are some key vintage cards in psa pop report (some are rounded): 1952t Mickey: 2050/20, 1948L Jackie: 1850/4, 1949B Jackie: 1800/8, 1933G 53 Babe 1250/6, 1909 T 206 Honus: 50 or so total, PSA/SGC/raw, auto=0.
As is case with historic and debut tickets, so few are signed by the key player... I will quote Rasheed Wallace "the ball don't lie"
.
I was reading article that today's kids what with smartphones, laptops, tablets, the skill to actually handwrite is a lost art. (Sure, we all know this is occurring.) We see modern/current players with scribble. Back in the day, penmanship was an actual class in grammar school.. the lined paper with dotted line in middle to help serve as guide on lower and upper case letters. We as collectors of cards all know the early days of actual cards began in early 1900's.. (or late 1800's) with very few examples of signed cards. (0 T 206 Honus are known to exist) so, if one is to sum up all the signed cards (all sports/ non sports) from 1900 to 1969 of iconic players, cards, etc.. there are very few in total. (relatively speaking) And as we all know all too well, a great majority of those legends have passed. Those with classic penmanship. Jackie, Babe, Lou, Willie, Mickey, Ted, Joe, and list goes on. As great as vintage non signed cards are to the hobby, classic autos on classic cards have place in hobby. the pop report shows clearly the number of signed cards of iconic players are limited and generally speaking, the opp to add on directly from the player has closed. These vintage signed cards in classic penmanship is one of the treasures of the hobby... As is case of any collectible, it always comes down to individual opinion and preference. The fact there are those who have disdain for signed cards, the beauty is no one forces anyone do collect anything... we all have choices of what we feel is worthy of our time and interest.
For me a lot of appeal of signed cards has to do with the quality of the graph. A Griffey Jr. is always appealing due to his penmanship. A scribble, regardless where it is on a card, is not appealing in the least.
I am the owner of the one playing days signed '52 Topps Mantle mentioned in the original post. Needless to say, I love and prefer signed cards for their rarity and their connection to the athlete— though I collect all types of cards, signed and unsigned. Given that such illustrious sets as 1952 Topps featured facsimile autographs, that shows having the athlete's signature on the card was attractive and for some the ideal. As a boy collecting, I dreamed of meeting my favorite players in real life and getting them to sign the cards of them that I loved looking at so much. It is also key to note that today's "hit" cards are all autographed; that is what is most desired today, and for the collectors who will carry things forward. Also noteworthy is that whether it is a Green Cobb or Goudey Ruth or any vintage card, really, these days the market has spoken and the signed version will command a premium. As CLLCT noted recently, a 1951 Bowman Mantle 1.5 sold for 11.5k, and the same grade with his signature is 155k.
For anyone interested in the fun of hunting such pieces, here is an article CLLCT recently did on my experience:
https://cllct.com/sports-collectibles/sports-cards/inside-one-collector-quest-for-rarest-mickey-mantle-signed-1952-topps-card
MTanaka, I assumed you are the Mr. Tanaka mentioned in that article? If so, congrats
Instagram: mattyc_collection
That's a great story, Matt. Thanks for sharing the link.
Thanks, it's all about identifying the fun paths we want to walk on our own individual collecting journeys. There is overlap and commonality in the sense we all love the sport and collecting, yet from there myriad paths branch out. Some love collecting cards, others memorabilia, some like signed, some unsigned, some both, some do sets, others just one player, some like high grade, some eschew paying big premiums for corners that could be trimmed, some do vintage, some only modern; there is no right and wrong, just paths we enjoy taking while we're lucky enough to be on the "playing field" of life.
Instagram: mattyc_collection