Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

PSA 1 with no qualifiers!

1959 Topps Mantle PSA 1

I'm sure the seller and the auction are totally legit, but I find it funny that he goes out of his way to mention that this PSA 1 has no qualifiers.

Well that does it! No qualifiers? I'm bidding!

Comments

  • KnucklesKnuckles Posts: 2,512 ✭✭✭
    I'll give that my own qualifier.

    POS
    image
  • lostdart58lostdart58 Posts: 2,938 ✭✭✭
    Who would like to venture a guess how much it will sell for??

    My guess is $68.55 (which is about $20 more then it is worth) IMHO
    Collector of:Baseball
    1955 Bowman Raw complete with 90% Ex-NR or better

    Now seeking 1949 Eureka Sportstamps...NM condition
    Working on '78 Autographed set now 99.9% complete -
    Working on '89 Topps autoed set now complete


  • This one looks like it could be a PSA 0 if they had one. Poor to fair?
  • It certainly is "one of a kind." image
  • looks as if it went thru the wash
  • ldfergldferg Posts: 6,745 ✭✭✭
    oh my gosh. if this is a 1 mine is a 10...i'll post a scan of my 59 psa 1. unbelievable in the difference.


    Thanks,

    David (LD_Ferg)



    1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
  • HoofHeartedHoofHearted Posts: 2,537 ✭✭
    I'd like to see a scan of the back before I even thought about bidding on this historic card...

    hh


  • << <i>oh my gosh. if this is a 1 mine is a 10...i'll post a scan of my 59 psa 1. unbelievable in the difference. >>



    I was thinking the same thing about a lot of my cards.....
  • detroitfan2detroitfan2 Posts: 3,337 ✭✭✭✭
    This is a perfect example of why PSA needs the BS (bicycle spokes) qualifier, even for PSA 1 cards.
  • I've received cards that looked great with a PSA 1 grade and it was just because of some "spider web" wrinkling. PSA needs to do something about low end 1's and high end 1's. Ridiculous.

    Damian
  • A761506A761506 Posts: 1,309 ✭✭✭
    I like the PSA grading scale, however, this is one area where it is flawed severly. Cards that find their way into PSA 1 holders are all classified in the same boat, but there are certain PSA 1's that are a heck of a lot nicer than others. That Mantle is a total piece of junk, even calling it POOR is overstating it. I've seen other PSA 1 which have beautiful looking cards but perhaps have back damage. Sometime the back damage is light, sometimes it's terrible. I'd like to see PSA adopt a PSA 0 grade, perhaps calling that grade FILLER. I also wouldn't mind seeing a 1.5 to designate a card which is Fair from a card which is Poor.
  • It went through the wind tunnel for testing

    My Auctions
  • pandrewspandrews Posts: 7,598 ✭✭✭
    imageimage
    ·p_A·
  • jrinckjrinck Posts: 1,321 ✭✭
    Wow, that's a darn nice "1".

    The nicest "1" I ever saw, though, was a PSA 1 '71 Topps Yaz. It looked GEM MINT, and the reason for the "1" was a tiny pin hole that was obscured near some of the lettering. One of you on the board may own it. It was around a few years ago that the auction for it was on Ebay. I should have bid.
  • eyeboneeyebone Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭
    The example I am about to offer is in stark contrast to the example offered by jrinck, and demonstrates why some grading companies aren't worth beans.

    A fews years ago I acquired a 1969 OPC Deckle card of Roberto Clemente. It was a gorgeous card with the exception of two tiny--but obvious--pinholes (I think the card had been stapled). I submitted it to an on-site grader (won't bother mentioning the name, but suffice to say they are no longer in business) at the Toronto Sports Card Expo, and it came back a NM-MT 8.

    Eyebone
    "I'm not saying I'm the best manager in the world, but I'm in the top one." Brian Clough
  • bobbybakerivbobbybakeriv Posts: 2,186 ✭✭✭✭
    I'll give that my own qualifier. POS

    That is hilarious. I agree with Knuckles.image
  • HoofHeartedHoofHearted Posts: 2,537 ✭✭
    A761506,

    Excellent idea!! I hope one of the fine folks at PSA reads your suggestion of a PSA 0 (Filler) grade. That's all that type of card is good for. No way does pandrew's much nicer '33 Goudey belong in the same class as that Mantle...

    hh oo
  • ldfergldferg Posts: 6,745 ✭✭✭
    here's mine in comparison to the other one. sorry for the large scan of mine. maybe i should resubmit... image

    image

    image


    Thanks,

    David (LD_Ferg)



    1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
  • kingraider75kingraider75 Posts: 1,500 ✭✭
    well there isn't a grade worse than a 1, so I guess it's kinda like getting an "F" in school. Whether it was with 50% or 20% correct, it's still an F! lol

    Gotta love a true filler card though.
    Running an Ebay store sure takes a lot more time than a person would think!
  • NickMNickM Posts: 4,895 ✭✭✭
    This is an acceptable filler to me. The entire card is still there, and there is no paper loss on the front, although the heavy creases do break the surface. There's also nothing that appears to be a major tear.

    It has been my pet peeve too on that PSA will give a vintage HOFer that is F/G the same grade as a card that has been abused almost to the point of unrecognizability. It has probably kept me from submitting several that would fill holes in my HOF Player Set.

    Nick
    image
    Reap the whirlwind.

    Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
  • Can't they give a card "authentic" instead of a grade?
  • HoofHeartedHoofHearted Posts: 2,537 ✭✭


    << <i>Can't they give a card "authentic" instead of a grade? >>



    Wow, another great suggestion using the tools already available! Wish I woulda thought of that!

    You may be getting a job offer from PSA next week...

    hh
  • dizzyfoxxdizzyfoxx Posts: 9,823 ✭✭✭
    That one was safely stored in some kid's back pocket for years!image
    image...There's always time for coin collecting. image
Sign In or Register to comment.