Help me grade my 1955 Topps before PSA does

chadridge · February 22, 2011 11:14AM

I'm getting back into the hobby after an 11 year break, and I'm resuming my 1955/1956 Topps collecting. I certainly don't have discerning eye for grades, but I do have over a hundred PSA graded 1955/1956 6's,7's, and 8's, and I can usually tell what grade they are by sight.

So I decided to jump into the raw submission fun! I picked up a number of nice looking 1955's, and am preparing to submit them. However, I just got the news back on my first one sent in, piggybacked on my 15 card voucher submission with 14 other cards I've had for 15+ years. It was not good.

I'm hoping that some skilled eyes can take a look at these raw 55's and let me know where you tink they'd grade, and if they are even worth submitting. These cards have definite eye appeal, and at arms length look better than almost all of my 6's and a good number of 7's.

Here is the link to my Photobucket folder (just set up, I hope it works): <div style="width:480px;text-align:right;"><embed width="480" height="360" src="http://static.pbsrc.com/flash/rss_slideshow.swf" flashvars="rssFeed=http%3A%2F%2Ffeed1220.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd442%2Fchadman11%2F1955%2520Topps%2520Raw%2Ffeed.rss" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" /><a href="http://photobucket.com/redirect/album?showShareLB=1" target="_blank"><img src="http://pic.photobucket.com/share/icons/embed/btn_geturs.gif" style="border:none;" /></a><a href="http://s1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd442/chadman11/1955 Topps Raw/" target="_blank"><img src="http://pic.photobucket.com/share/icons/embed/btn_viewall.gif" style="border:none;" /></a></div>

I really appreciate any feedback you may have. Thanks for the help.

Chad

chadridge · February 22, 2011 11:15AM

Crap, try this link instead.

http://s1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd442/chadman11/1955 Topps Raw/

Thanks,
Chad

Dboneesq · February 22, 2011 11:26AM

Chad,

Here you go. This will be easier.

BTW ... I think we could give you a lot better idea if the pics were larger. From what I could see, I would say the majority are in the "5" range.

chadridge · February 22, 2011 11:28AM

Thanks Doug. My HTML ain't what it used to be

Chad

chadridge · February 22, 2011 11:36AM

Each scan is pretty high resolution, 1400 x 2000. Can I modify Photobucket to show these images in full scale? Still figuring this out.

Thanks

MantleMarisFordBerra · February 22, 2011 11:56AM

Nice cards, I agree most look to fall in the 5ish range. Best card is the Berra, but is that water damage/satining at bottom of the card? If so that will obviously bring the grade down or be hit with a qualifier. Either way, those are some nice cards you have there!

chadridge · February 22, 2011 12:23PM

OK, I have about 8 of the cards individually scanned. Thanks for the tip.

I was hoping for 6's and 7's, but it sounds like I was off a bit. They still have great eye appeal, and I'm happy with them, but it makes me question whether grading them is really the way to go. The larger question is, do I really need to be buying 6's and 7's if these are 5's!!!

I know, "buy the card, not the slab", but when you buy on the Bay, it's almost impossible to know what the card really looks like.

Thanks to all.

relaxed · February 22, 2011 1:39PM

Chad,

I think the main question you have to ask yourself is what you want for the makeup of the set. Are you willing to have PSA 5's with 6's & 7's.
Most of the cards on Photobucket I think fall in the PSA 5 category.

For myself I started the set in PSA 5 and above, but I decided about half way through that I wanted a minimum of PSA 6. I mostly bought graded cards but when I did submit some raw cards I wasn't going to submit common cards unless I was reasonable sure they would come back as a PSA 6 because with the price of submission and shipping I would probably be losing money when it was time to sell them if they came back as PSA 5's

Although I haven't been in a rush to sell my extra 55's I do have quite a few PSA 5's and 6's that you might need.

gameusedhoop · February 22, 2011 8:38PM

bobbyw8469 · February 22, 2011 9:17PM

I really like the Berra...I can see that in a '5' or '5.5' holder....

fiveniner · February 22, 2011 9:34PM

Love those 55s. I believe Berra could get a 4.5 the others range 4 to 5 at best.I take that anytime.

chadridge · February 23, 2011 1:18AM

Thanks for your responses, and thanks to gameusedhoops for the posted pix.

It's a tough call for me, I was expecting 6's and maybe some 7's. I still like the cards, and perhaps I'm finding that I'm simply an EX or above collector. Perhaps what is important to me is not so in the PSA grading system. I'm not so interested in the corners, as much as vivid color and minimal fading. Not sure if that's even a criteria for PSA. I don't really have a problem with this, but I think that slabbing these cards as 5's is probably flushing that money down the toilet (at least for the commons, I have 30+ of them). I could buy all of these again in 6's on ebay for not much more than the grading fees. I have had a secondary goal of keeping my collection relatively liquid.

Part of me still wants to send them in just to see if I get any 6's. I suppose that this is a dilemma that all collector's go through at some point, maybe I'll just consider it a rite of passage, and a lesson learned. I think I'll avoid raw cards on Ebay from now on, at least until I develop a better eye.

Thanks to all who posted for the advice

Chad

chadridge · February 23, 2011 2:31AM

FYI, I have a number of 6's and 7's that look extremely similar to these cards, corners & centering included. Many have less "eye appeal". Either I have my hands on a large number of cracked slabs, or grading consistency is not being maintained as well as it could be. I don't have a trained eye, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now, but I'll admit that it has me questioning the entire grading industry.

Would I be correct in guessing that "over-graded cards frequently find their way to online auctions, or other places where the buyer can't get a detailed look at the card before purchase? And the "No returns on graded cards" policies is looking shadier by the minute.

Chad

WinPitcher · February 23, 2011 2:43AM

Chad

Hi and welcome. I have built this set. No reason not to build it in 5-6 grade.

What I did though was grade only the money cards (or buy only them already graded)

The commons simply went in top loaders. One thing though, you can find 5's on ebay

already graded pretty cheap. Hi numbers too. 55 is by no means a scarce set.

It IMO has about 4 or 5 cards that will cost you in 5 grade, Clemente, Koufax, Snider

and a few others that I can't recall. It's a beautiful set. I just sold off most of it on ebay.

Good luck and have fun, try to buy centered examples in the 5 - 6 range.

Steve

chadridge · February 23, 2011 3:18AM

Thanks for the advice. I know that this is probably what I should do, but I was hoping to get all cards in PSA holders, just for the consistent look.

Did you sell your cards in the last month or so? If so, I'm guessing that I may have bought a few.

Chad

Dboneesq · February 23, 2011 3:26AM

Chad,

You are right ... some of those cards do have nice eye appeal. But if you are going to send them in to PSA HOPING for a couple 6s and 7s, IMO, I would save my money. I don't think any of the above cards have a shot at a 6 or 7. If you decide to send them in I hope I am WRONG! GOOD LUCK with the set!

Stone193 · February 23, 2011 3:31AM

Hi Chad

Good luck on the set - due to it's size - it's one of the more popular sets with collectors - especially all PSA.

Of interest - Tuff Stuff in the late 80s considered the 55 and 56T sets as unpopular due to the horizontal design - that's definitely changed.

chadridge · February 23, 2011 4:21AM

I've always loved the landscape format. I bought 15 or so of the top stars for the 1956 set back in 1994, and had 5 of them PSA graded in 1999, along with a beautiful 1955 Mays that got a 7. After 12 years, I figured it was time to treat myself again. It looks like I got pretty lucky with the cards I bought back in 1994 (all 6's and 7's) when I really didnt know what I was doing (not that I do now).

I did buy a 1956 Mantle for $100 (back in 1995 as well) at a card show that was in pretty rough shape, but just got it graded as a 2.5, so that was probably a good buy. Gotta take the little victories where I can get 'em

thunderdan · February 23, 2011 6:34AM

I'm looking for a Koufax that's not trimmed. If you have one, please let me know.

divecchia · February 23, 2011 7:41AM

Hi chad...

I would have to agree with the others. I think your looking at mostly 4-5 range. At those grades you may be better off buying them already graded.

Good luck with the set...

Donato

WinPitcher · February 23, 2011 8:38AM

Chad

Yes I did and I think you did too.

Steve

thehallmark · February 23, 2011 10:15AM

<< <i>The larger question is, do I really need to be buying 6's and 7's if these are 5's!!!

I know, "buy the card, not the slab", but when you buy on the Bay, it's almost impossible to know what the card really looks like. >>

That's a great question and I think you know the answer. Unless you see some clear emotional/financial benefit, there is no need to upgrade if you like the condition of your cards. I often feel like the happiest guys around here are the ones who collect mostly raw vintage.

Regarding your Ebay comment here, I know it can seem like a crapshoot at times, but there are little tricks to finding the good cards on Ebay and if you make that a goal of yours, you will get better at it over time.

WeekendHacker · February 23, 2011 1:31PM

What a great set to put together!! I'm not old enough to have bought these in packs, but this set is a genuine classic. It doesn't hurt your wallet by not having Mickey Mantle in there either. The rookies will set you back though. Then there's the Snider, last card in the set - toughie. As a bonus, you get 2nd issue cards of Aaron, Banks & Kaline but not the price of their rookies. I only have 4 graded cards that I'd be willing to move for the right price. Best of luck with your set!!

Mike

The Kaline is a borderline '8' in a '6' holder due to a crimp on the white border under the 'LI' in his last name.

chadridge · February 23, 2011 2:33PM

Well, I cherry picked the best 25 out of the 39 total cards, and I'm going to submit and take a shot. I've decided that I will welcome them into my set as 5's if that's what they get. Honestly, after reviewing all of my 1955 PSA 6's, I don't think a few 6's are out of the question.

I got myself a loop and took a hard look at all of the cards, and I feel a lot more confident about my grading ability now. I'm still learning. In other happier news, I took a hard look at twenty 1956 raw cards that I had recently bought to be graded as well, and they are very solid, clearly a level or two above these 55's. So I'm a little less despondent today

I'll share the grading news with everyone when it arrives.

Thanks again

chadridge · March 17, 2011 2:41AM

OK, guys. The first result is in, and I wanted to share it with everyone who helped me pre-grade these cards.

18461027 EXCELLENT+ 5.5 1955 TOPPS 198 YOGI BERRA Card US

I'll take it. Looking back, bobbyw8469 called a 5 to 5.5, nicely done

This thread was an immense learning opportunity for me, so thanks to all who helped. The rest of the 55's (24) that I sent in were under a $5 Feb Collectors Club special, so I expect a wait for those results. Based on this, I am still hoping for some 6's in that bunch. I'll re-post when those pop.

Chad

chadridge · April 7, 2011 7:39AM

UPDATE

Here are the rest of the grades for the 25 cards that were sent in.

NEAR MINT 7 1955 TOPPS 9 BOB MILLER
NEAR MINT 7 1955 TOPPS 14 JIM FINIGAN
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 15 JIM PENDLETON
N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1955 TOPPS 19 BILLY HERMAN
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 20 ANDY CAREY
EXCELLENT-MINT+ 6.5 1955 TOPPS 23 JACK PARKS
NEAR MINT-MINT 8 OC 1955 TOPPS 25 JOHNNY PODRES
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 58 JIM RIVERA
NEAR MINT 7 OC 1955 TOPPS 64 GUS TRIANDOS
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 81 GENE CONLEY
NEAR MINT 7 1955 TOPPS 82 CHUCK HARMON
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 98 JOHNNY RIDDLE
EXCELLENT 5 1955 TOPPS 100 MONTE IRVIN
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 114 LOU ORTIZ
NEAR MINT 7 1955 TOPPS 125 KEN BOYER
EXCELLENT 5 1955 TOPPS 127 DALE LONG
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 129 ELVIN TAPPE
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 136 BUNKY STEWART
NEAR MINT 7 1955 TOPPS 141 TOM WRIGHT
N5: ALTERED STOCK 1955 TOPPS 144 JOE AMALFITANO
NEAR MINT 7 1955 TOPPS 146 DICK DONOVAN
NEAR MINT+ 7.5 1955 TOPPS 161 CHUCK TANNER
NEAR MINT 7 1955 TOPPS 170 JIM PEARCE
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 177 JIM ROBERTSON
EXCELLENT-MINT 6 1955 TOPPS 187 GIL HODGES

Again, these were the best 25 of my 39 total raw purchases, as far as I could tell. Overall, I was quite happy with the results, especially after being scared sh*tless by a few of you

I think that one lesson learned here for me is that even nice cards can look pretty rough with high-resolution scans. I may go ahead and send the rest in, just to see if I can get any more 6's.

Thanks again to everyone.
Chad

SOM · April 7, 2011 8:14AM

That must be a gorgeous Chuck tanner!

Nice going!

Bosox1976 · April 7, 2011 8:28AM

Fine work

WinPitcher · April 7, 2011 8:50AM

Good job.

Those 6's are they centered?

Steve

Help me grade my 1955 Topps before PSA does

Comments