1971 Topps PSA 10 Cards On eBay- Observations

Mefer

I found these two PSA 10 1971 Topps cards on eBay just today:

#731 Jim Qualls

# 328 World Series Game 2

Here are my comments.

The Qualls card has been very hard in my experience to find centered. This card, obviously, is the best one I have seen. However, and perhaps it is just the scan, the left border appears to have a very slight rounded cut and not exactly straight. Given the grade of PSA 10, I have to give PSA the benefit of the doubt that the scan is playing tricks. There does, however, also to be some very modest (and I do mean modest) chipping on the right border. Again, this can be the scanner playing tricks with my eyes. What do you guys think?

The World Series card, in my opinion, appears overall much nicer than the Qualls. While I have not measured the card, it appears to be darn close to 50/50 all around. It is nonetheless interesting to note that the lower right border near the top of the exclamation point exhibits a very slight ding. The top also appears to have some "peach fuzz" with perhaps even a very minute amount of chipping.

The corners, I think, on both examples are blazers. It has been my experience that corners are the number one thing the graders look at on this issue. With blazing corners, some exceptions appear to be allowable for the borders. I found this to be true with respect to 8s and 9s. With 10s I would expect there would not be as much leniency.

With the above said, the 10s are definately very nice cards. They offer more to chew on in what can oftentimes be the difficulty faced in applying grading criteria to such a difficult issue like 71 Topps. I would be interested in reading comments of others.

jrinck

What stands out the most, to me, is that very noticable dot above the "m" in his name.

The centering isn't too hot, either, even if it is within the parameters of a 10.

This would make a nice 7 or 8, but not a 10. But at $200+ with nine days to go, it looks like another case of "Buy the holder, not the card".

Good for the seller. Bad for the hobby.

A761506

Both those cards look amazing to me. I've handled a lot of 71's and when I see cards that look that nice, I look closer and can usually spot evidence of recoloring or trimming. Assuming those are unaltered 71's, I doubt you will find much nicer looking specimens of those particular cards.

calleocho

i agree with A761506, these are blazing cards

i am not sure i would have notice those tiny flaws have mefer not mentioned them.

i have said this before, but i really feel that the "10" is by far the most controversial and over rated grade.

there is just not such a thing as a perfect card, a flaw can always be found is looked hard enough.

i have a hard time believing that there is any practical difference between a solid 9 and a 10 expect getting lucky.

but people seem to love it!..lol ..all the other reputable companies go even a step father and have Mint, Gem Mint , and then pristine or whatever it is called

Fabfrank

Those card are both 10's. The WS card is a screamer. I also noticed the dot on the Qualls card, but didn't notice the "modest" chipping Mefer suggests. It think it might be a little scanner/holder glare. If the Qualls card was in a 9 holder, we would be making an arguement that PSA was too harsh. It's a very strong 9 and I have no problem with either card in a 10 holder.

sjeanblanc

Mefer,

I have to concur with the group, these are some really nice 71 cards, that I feel are as deserving of a PSA 10 as any I've seen. Remember PSA weights corners as a cards most dominating attribute, these cards appear to have razor corners with no white showing. Gem Mint cards don't have to be perfect according to the PSA guidelines, as much as we would like it otherwise.

Scott J.