1952 Topps Mickey Mantle #311

My cycloptic eye detects flaws that should, theoretically, result in worse visual appeal than what exists in reality. Such is the inexact science of beauty. Surface wear is the primary sin, followed by a wrinkle, corner rounding, and the type of centering and tilt so endemic to the 1952 Topps Mantle population. Still, this card has survived decades better than many human institutions. My rating subroutines cannot ignore this level of disruption. however. Above all, existence in this state after so much attention and handling through 74 years is its own trophy.

The flaw that does jump out to me is the scuffing on his face. If that or the crease was gone, I would say B-.

The surface and wrinkle certainly affect eye appeal yet not so much that it hits the D tier. If the scuffs avoided his face I would think B-.

It's fine, but guys there are other cards in the hobby. How is this now $50k+? Maybe I'm just jealous.

I feel like this is the textbook, nice C+ eye appeal specimen. The flaws such as surface and the crease are not as impactful as some other flaws on other examples using COMPARE, and the centering is C Tier for me as well.

Despite its flaws, it still has decent eye appeal.

Despite all of the wear it still has great image and color.

A great card to own and the centerpiece of many collections in any condition. Centering is off but better than many. The surface issues and crease stand out and there is corner wear as well.

The crease in the upper right and surface wear throughout the card does detract from the eye appeal for me. A great card to own nonetheless.

not the best uploads to grade it as well as I would have liked. The card is off centered but better than most and has nice sized borders. Alot of surface wear but mostly blends in but does affect the image quality and the colors. But a card I would be proud to own and share