Home› PSA Set Registry Forum

Further proof that it's a bad idea to list cards on EBAY while on drugs

acowaacowa Posts: 945 ✭✭
in PSA Set Registry Forum
This seller makes such a big deal about how this card is centered and how rare it is to find a centered card. Then you get to the punch line.

1964 Topps Rose "centered"


image

Comments

  • AknotAknot Posts: 1,196 ✭✭
    Since I am "unfamiliar" with Baseball cards is it common to have the Black name tag so "off" the rest of the card? The section I am refering to is above /next to second base. It does not align with the rest of the card....
    image
  • jrdolanjrdolan Posts: 2,549 ✭✭
    The centering is not bad, but I wouldn't brag about it. As for the black name bar not quite matching the photo, my '64 Rose is like that too, but many other stars are not. A '64 collector could say how common it is.
  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    <<THIS IS EVERY BIT AS NICE AS THE PSA 9 NOW FOR SALE ON EBAY CURRENT BID AT $3075 !!!

    Pete's 1963 rookie card is an ugly card with 4 little face pictures, >>


    That card "every bit as nice as the PSA 9"? - Gee, I don't think so.

    Also, first time I ever heard a Rose rookie card called "ugly"

  • pcpc Posts: 743 ✭
    the nameplate is always a littel off but some more than others.
    Money is your ticket to freedom.
  • gmoneystylesgmoneystyles Posts: 349 ✭✭
    Stevek, you missed the ugliest rookie cards recent thread; Pete Rose's Rookie card was given notice as being ugly. In my books, the guy is right; the card is pretty damn ugly. I am worried that one night when I am really drunk and my vision is blurred I'll mistake the red and yellow on the true rookie card for a hotdog and eat it. I would rather have the second year.
    Now looking for a 1950 Bowman Baseball Box as pictured below.
    image
  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    <<Stevek, you missed the ugliest rookie cards recent thread; Pete Rose's Rookie card was given notice as being ugly. In my books, the guy is right; the card is pretty damn ugly. I am worried that one night when I am really drunk and my vision is blurred I'll mistake the red and yellow on the true rookie card for a hotdog and eat it. I would rather have the second year. >>

    I did see that thread but didn't participate in it. There is not a single 50s or 60s Topps baseball card that I would call "ugly" - ESPECIALLY a card such as the Pete Rose rookie card. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. image
  • gmoneystylesgmoneystyles Posts: 349 ✭✭
    Really, you think his '63 looks better than the '64?
    Now looking for a 1950 Bowman Baseball Box as pictured below.
    image
  • gemintgemint Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭✭✭
    If you want to really get down to it, I can't think of a card that isn't "ugly". Unless Topps issued a 1980 Christy Brinkley card I'm not aware of. image
    https://ebay.com/sch/gemint/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=
  • pandrewspandrews Posts: 7,598 ✭✭✭
    pete rose is fugly.
    ·p_A·
  • marzmarz Posts: 1,601
    This card actually looks trimmed on the top right to me.
    live each day like it's your last but don't count on it!
Sign In or Register to comment.