What’s the best 1950’s Topps set to collect?

[livealoha]

What’s the best 1950’s Topps set to collect?

I like the 1955 topps set

I’m also leaning toward going down the rabbit hole and starting a 1952 topps set!!! Talk me out if it! LOL

[discodanman45]

1951 Topps, it is the smallest set and least expensive.

[cowboyfaninlr]

1957 is my favorite

[towerymt]

'57 is big....I did that one over ~15 years.

'54 would be my choice now.

[rnocards]

I like 1956, especially Mantle's leaping catch.

But seriously, it has got to be the 1952. You just need to save up enough money for it, even in very poor condition.

[rats60]

1958 Topps is the only set that is complete. It has the first Topps Stan Musial and the last Ted Williams. Every other year you will have an incomplete set.

1956 would be the second choice. It is only missing Stan Musial and has the last cards of Jackie Robinson and Bob Feller.

1952 Topps has terrible player selection. You will spend a lot of money getting all the different cards Topps made. You will spend a lot of time finding the high numbers. In the end, you have a collection of baseball cards missing 3 of the 4 best players in the game at the time.

[mfw13]

If cost is a concern, then 1956 is by far the best choice, since it contains no major rookie cards (Aparicio is the biggest name) and has a very pleasing design.

And as "Rats60" noted above, it contains the last cards of Jackie Robinson and Bob Feller, while also containing cards of all the early 50's rookies (Mays, Mantle, Aaron, Banks, Koufax, Clemente, etc.).

[rats60]

1958 is similar to 1956. Orlando Cepeda is the only HOF RC although the Roger Maris RC brings good money. Neither have high numbers like 1952, 1953, 1955, 1957 and 1959. Both are very easy to complete.

[towerymt]

Originally Posted by rats60

1958 is similar to 1956. Orlando Cepeda is the only HOF RC although the Roger Maris RC brings good money. Neither have high numbers like 1952, 1953, 1955, 1957 and 1959. Both are very easy to complete.

Since you probably know, I'll ask...do you know why '57 4th series (or is it really 2nd series?) is scarce compared to the rest of the set?

This says 2nd of 3 series: https://www.psacard.com/cardfacts/ba...1957-topps/165

Most refer to the 4th series as the scarce series out of 5 total:
http://www.baseballcardpedia.com/index.php/1957_Topps
https://www.justcollect.com/baseball/sets/1957-topps/
https://bbcemporium.com/index.php?st...ep2=topps_1957

I would guess that it's true based on Koufax and Brooks Robinson total counts in the PSA pop report, ~3,100 and ~3,700 total graded, vs. 4,000-5,000+ for some of the stars in other series (Drysdale, Aaron, Williams, Mantle, F. Robinson, Mantle/Berra).

But why the 4th series and not the high series?

[mfw13]

Originally Posted by rats60

1958 is similar to 1956. Orlando Cepeda is the only HOF RC although the Roger Maris RC brings good money. Neither have high numbers like 1952, 1953, 1955, 1957 and 1959. Both are very easy to complete.

True, although 1958 has the first All-Star subset, which will bump up the cost a bit.

[Wisztradamous]

I am assuming you're talking about Baseball?
I've been considering starting a baseball set, and I do love the 50's. The smallest set would be the one I would take on.

When you said 50's, I immediately think 1955 Topps All-American Set (football). I have lots of these and I feel that it's the best football set ever.

[aguinness]

I don't think you can go wrong with any 50s set, although I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the 53 set. Perhaps that just proves how underrated it is!

[oplum29]

57 is my favorite, such an iconic set overall.

[lakesidez]

For me I've found myself to gravitate towards the 1957 Topps cards and 1958 Topps All-Stars, I'll say as of late 1953 Topps from an artwork\iconic perspective has me intrigued as well.

[Wisztradamous]

Originally Posted by aguinness

I don't think you can go wrong with any 50s set, although I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the 53 set. Perhaps that just proves how underrated it is!

I've heard a lot of YouTubers claim the 53 set is the closest to Perfect you can get for a set.

It is a great set, for baseball.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Wisztradamous

I've heard a lot of YouTubers claim the 53 set is the closest to Perfect you can get for a set.

It is a great set, for baseball.

No Ted Williams or Stan Musial.

[Wisztradamous]

Originally Posted by rats60

No Ted Williams or Stan Musial.

Ahh, I didn't even realize this. I think they're talking aesthetics.

[Sluggerrr]

Originally Posted by Wisztradamous

I've heard a lot of YouTubers claim the 53 set is the closest to Perfect you can get for a set.

It is a great set, for baseball.

I like the 1953 set, one of my favorite sets from the 50's, but as @sportscards.and.sunsets from the Rough Cuts podcast stated, some of the cards are underwhelming (i.e. Whitey Ford). There are enough beautiful cards to make up for the bad ones, though.

[smackvay]

1956 is a great set i build a raw and slabbed one
Cards are/were easy to get ahold of and most are affordable

[livealoha]

I think all of the 1950’s topps baseball sets are beautiful works of art! It’s hard to pick just one set to collect. However, I do winder for investment purposes, if the grand daddy of them all, the 1952 topps baseball set will yield the greatest ROI ..aka… the safest and best set to invest in?

[IgnatiusJReilly]

I’d vote 1956 Topps. Amazing design, the single best ensemble of players (there is no other set with Mantle, Jackie, and Ted), and no crazy expensive rookies. It’s the first vintage set that sunk its teeth into me and I’ve never looked back!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[towerymt]

Topps checklist chart.

    X		topps card (may also have a bowman card that year)
   (B)		no topps card, but a bowman card
--------	no topps or bowman card that year

I picked major names, mostly HOF'ers I spotted in bold in the checklists: https://www.baseball-almanac.com/bas...hp?s=1952top01

Maris the lone non-HOF'er I think. Any names I should have included?

[Wisztradamous]

Originally Posted by Sluggerrr

I like the 1953 set, one of my favorite sets from the 50's, but as @sportscards.and.sunsets from the Rough Cuts podcast stated, some of the cards are underwhelming (i.e. Whitey Ford). There are enough beautiful cards to make up for the bad ones, though.

Ahh yes, that Whitey Ford, the one that looks like he has Black Eyes!? I actually have one at PSA now.

Is there a poll anywhere for this topic?

[Wisztradamous]

Originally Posted by towerymt

Topps checklist chart.

    X		topps card (may also have a bowman card that year)
   (B)		no topps card, but a bowman card
--------	no topps or bowman card that year

I picked major names, mostly HOF'ers I spotted in bold in the checklists: https://www.baseball-almanac.com/bas...hp?s=1952top01

Maris the lone non-HOF'er I think. Any names I should have included?

Looks like 56 has the edge from that chart.

[lakesidez]

Interesting on Killebrew, is there any history or story behind why he was omitted from 1957 Topps?