Show your low PSA grade cards that present well

BaltimoreYankee

I thought this might make a good thread as I just picked up this PSA 2 1934 Goudey of Charley Gehringer. There is some glue residue on the back, as if it was pasted into an album with a stamp hinge (hence the low grade) but no paper loss.

ReggieCleveland

ReggieCleveland

swish54

Looks like it could be an 8 but has tape residue on back, no paper loss.

JBrules

Not a Goudey but looks pretty good for the grade.

mattyc_collection

My favorite topic.

Brick

DM23HOF. That is one tremendous collection.

JBrules

Well not that DM23HOF has posted his unbelievable collection it is all down hill from here. BTW do you still have the PSA 1 Jordan Rookie?.
Another one of my favorites is this 57 Aaron. Those Goudey's are pretty incredible as well.

mattyc_collection

Thanks, Ralph. I got them from the bank box one day last week and brought them to the office. Made the day more fun.

mattyc_collection

@JBrules said:
Well not that DM23HOF has posted his unbelievable collection it is all down hill from here. BTW do you still have the PSA 1 Jordan Rookie?.
Another one of my favorites is this 57 Aaron. Those Goudey's are pretty incredible as well.

That Aaron is bananas. I had not seen that one. Still have the MJ...

Dand522612

What’s wrong with the MJ?

1951WheatiesPremium

I love this card, despite the 3. Clean surface, REALLY nicely centered, crease upper left isn't too distracting and corners that fall into the soft category between sharp and rounded with a decent appearance of sharpness to the naked eye. My iPad (and arm) is faintly in the glare around his mouth; that's not on the card itself...

1956 TOPPS MICKEY MANTLE #135

mattyc_collection

pinhole

rcmb3220

@Dand522612 said:
What’s wrong with the MJ?

Yes, I don't think this thread should continue until this gets answered

1951WheatiesPremium

This is also a really nice item for a 2, in my humble opinion:

KendallCat

I saw the title and said to myself "Matt has this one covered going away!"

Thought I had a few more lower grades but only have one card low enough to qualify.

That 57 Mantle in a 2.5 is a monster, and the Shoeless Joe

Dpeck100

For more modern cards a PSA 5 is low grade. I still can't find the wrinkle on the JYD but you can see the wrinkle on the Hogan. Both otherwise look great!

1966CUDA

Beautiful PSA 1..... small pin hole above letter "d" in outfield.

1966CUDA

Really wish PSA had a PH qualifier (pin hole).

secretstash

Dand522612

@DM23HOF said:
pinhole

Still a beauty, would still like it.

TomTim

New acquisition. This was the only way I could get a presentable one.

ReggieCleveland

Wow, this is so much better than all the previous iterations of this thread. Not sure what that means but great cards, everybody.

Arthur

pdub1819

Here’s my favorite... pinhole...

JBL

originalisbest

I don't really like low grades due to paper loss or glue, but a properly placed pinhole can be great!

BaltimoreYankee

You guys have some fantastic stuff. My favorite was the SGC 1 Joe Jackson. Sometimes I search eBay for "PSA 1 pinhole". Besides pinhole cards, there are many cards out there that present really well on the obverse but may have some paper loss on the reverse. If you don't mind that, there are iconic cards to be had at affordable prices.

JBrules

That Cobb is awesome for the grade. What brings it down to a PSA 2?

@JBL said:

JBL

@JBrules said:
That Cobb is awesome for the grade. What brings it down to a PSA 2?

Very light spots of paper loss on the back towards the top

KendallCat

@JBL said:

@JBrules said:
That Cobb is awesome for the grade. What brings it down to a PSA 2?

Very light spots of paper loss on the back towards the top

My kind of card. People look at the front and not the back anyways. Seen many PSA 6/7 cards with 70/30 centering that looked horrible, and would take that 2 all day.

Indy78

Here are some of my favorite vintage cards in my collection. All low grade, cheap (<$30), and visually appealing IMO. The 1957's are part of a mixed graded and ungraded set I'm building in low grade condition. The 69 banks is part of low grade 69 set I'm building.

JBL

@KendallCat said:
My kind of card. People look at the front and not the back anyways. Seen many PSA 6/7 cards with 70/30 centering that looked horrible, and would take that 2 all day.

I'm with ya. I'm all about great eye appeal and centering that has a low technical grade. Saves me money so I can get the cards I like at an affordable cost. Here's a couple more. Just recently picked up the 54B Williams.

mattyc_collection

Oh, how I miss that Ruth! Major regret parting with that one.

thesouthdoesitagain

Just a few that joined my collection
(Paige has a tiny pinhole)

(Mickey had pencil/erasure at top-MK)
(Jax had been slice/repair at top)

1951WheatiesPremium

Pinhole poor with great eye appeal:

ToneD

Great cards guys.

Jerry - Love that Cobb. If you ever get tired of it let me know.

ToneD

thunderdan

This one:

muffins

KendallCat

Since 4's are included I woukd say these are a few of my favorites from my collection:

muffins

but yours dont have ink marks!

cardcountry

Love this thread. Great stuff guys!!

1951WheatiesPremium

@muffins said:

WRONG THREAD!

You're looking for the 'greatest cards ever' thread. A signed 4 Clemente rookie? Three threads downs...

TheMick

originalisbest

All great cards! All things considered, I prefer a mild unobtrusive crease, or especially a neat pinhole, but I despise paper loss on the back that affects graphics. If the paper loss is at a margin or corner, and all printed graphics are intact, that's A-OK by me. Everyone has their things.

ugaskidawg

I just have a couple to throw up here...

I know 4s are the limit, but for a junk era card, I'll go with an 89 Griffey UD 5. Dreaded hologram.

Lastly, I know I am breaking the laws of thread posting, but I just had to throw this one up here ungraded. It is in my 1960 binder set, but would come back a 2 at most. It has feint wrinkles through the whole card. I had to hold it to the right light to even see them.

originalisbest

Really really nice '60 Yaz. Love it!

ReggieCleveland

That '49 Satch up there is outstanding. Congrats to whomever it was that posted that. That's a trophy.

Dan, you know how I feel about your Mantle. I simply can't fathom why anyone would pay for a PSA 5/6 when your 1.5 looks sooooooooooo much better. I need to stop looking at it now. I'm having bad thoughts.

The centering on that Yaz is excellent. Crazy part is that's an above average print job too. Nice pickup.

Arthur

ToneD

@ReggieCleveland said:
That '49 Satch up there is outstanding. Congrats to whomever it was that posted that. That's a trophy.

Thank you Arthur. For the life of me, I can't figure why it's a 3. I resubbed it as a 3 and it got a .5 grade bump. Absolutely no creases or wrinkles. The spots on Satch's hat are not paperloss. Still a head scratcher to me.

maddux69

Here is my pinhead, err pinhole addition

ReggieCleveland

@ToneD said:

@ReggieCleveland said:
That '49 Satch up there is outstanding. Congrats to whomever it was that posted that. That's a trophy.

Thank you Arthur. For the life of me, I can't figure why it's a 3. I resubbed it as a 3 and it got a .5 grade bump. Absolutely no creases or wrinkles. The spots on Satch's hat are not paperloss. Still a head scratcher to me.

How much would it even mean, really? When it gets sold it's not getting sold for 3.5 money, that's for sure. With a card like that you just enjoy it. Thanks for sharing it.

All this talk of pinholes and we haven't had a single T3 yet? I can't even say pinhole without thinking of T3s.

Arthur