Approaching the 1952 Topps Set

[CamaroDMD]

I have been thinking and discussing a lot about doing a baseball set (I've mostly done football vintage) and trying to figure out what I want to do. The truth is...the 1952 Topps set has always been first in my mind (and everyone else). My original plan was a 57 or newer set...something I could do fairly quickly and put in an album, but the more I think about it the more that seems less and less gratifying. Why not do something worthwhile?

The more I think, the more I think about 1952. The truth is, I think I can do it. I'm only 28 and I'm a year into my career as a dentist...so I have a career of good income potential ahead of me. Why not take it slow and build a 1952 set? Frankly, until it comes to the high numbers and big names I can do it as a side project for a while.

The way I figure it, I can focus in the PSA 4-5 range and buy one card at a time. Probably start with the low numbers (cheaper and right now since I'm so early in my career my disposable income is lower) and work my way up. I'd probably just do a basic set too...probably focusing on red backs (I think they look nicer). One of my big focuses will be on centering and overall eye appeal.

A couple questions though. I feel that if I am going to do this...invest all the time and money into this project that each card should be graded. What do you think about that?

Also, my understanding is that the first 80 cards came in both red and black back variety. Is that the case? It seems, just looking at the sales prices that the black backs tend to command a little more of a premium. Is that accurate or am I over analyzing?

Finally, in the PSA 4-5 range what should a graded low number common with good centering sell for?

[Zone91]

All you need to know (link below) and for me yes I prefer graded cards of the same company for a set build:

http://www.psacard.com/Articles/ArticleView/5541/psa-set-registry-1952-topps-baseball-cards-much-more-than-meets-the-eye

Most people do not collect the gray backs since they are just to expensive!!

Post # 4

[ALR-bishop]

The first 80 cards in the set do come with either red of black backs and the black backs usually do carry a small premium. Unless you eventually plan to pursue a master set ( or even if you do) a mix of the two backs is not unusual in first building the set. I prefer ungraded cards because you can then easily store them in 8 pocket sheet in a binder for easy access and display. But I pursue cards as a hobby and not an investment. If your goal is to one day sell at a profit, graded cards might serve you better. In the 4th post of the 1952 Mantle thread in this forum CW ( Chuck) has a link to 2 good resources to research pricing.

Good luck

[steve B]

You might want to consider trying some of the more expensive cards early. Those seem to increase more quickly. When I started collecting a nice common was $3 and Mantles just under $1000. Now Psa 4 commons are around $14 or so, some cheaper. And Mantle is expensive even for worn one. Way more than 4x the price they were in 1980.

You won't progress as quickly, but I think what you pay will eventually be less than buying the stars last.

Steve B

[Zach Wheat]

Camaro,

When I started completing the set a number of years ago, I concentrated on picking up 1 or more lots of cards either at auction, eBay or privately. I did not worry so much about every grade as I knew I would have plenty of time to upgrade later. I preferred to allocate resources to buying cards rather than fees on grading. You have the advantage in this environment in that prices for most cards - particularly the high end ones - are more reasonable now than at other times.

I also tried to acquire high numbers whenever they were under a certain condition sensitive price point - and this strategy has served me well.

I have also found cardtarget.com to be a great "free" resource for tracking prices. They have a separate section devoted to 1952 Topps sales.

Best of luck,

ZWheat

[CamaroDMD]

One thing I have always wondered about these cards is how was the image made? They appear to be drawings...but sometimes they also appear to have some photographic traits to them. Are they solely drawings done by an artist (like some of the earlier cards), are they a photograph that has been heavily enhanced by an artist...or something else? I have always assumed they are drawings...but I have never had that confirmed.

[steve B]

Colorized black and white photos, so yep enhanced by an artist.

There's an example of a flexichrome on this site, plus a few other production pieces.

http://www.1952toppsbaseballcards.com/

Steve B

[CamaroDMD]

Colorized black and white photos, so yep enhanced by an artist.

There's an example of a flexichrome on this site, plus a few other production pieces.

http://www.1952toppsbaseballcards.com/

Steve B

OK, that's what I thought. Thanks for the info.

Next question, why did the first series have red or black backs? Was there a reason for the difference and why did they only have red starting with the second series?

[Brianruns10]

OK, that's what I thought. Thanks for the info.

Next question, why did the first series have red or black backs? Was there a reason for the difference and why did they only have red starting with the second series?

Good question! Others here may know a definitive answer. There may have been some technical reasons for the switch, but I personally think it comes down to this being the first series of what was a pretty new experiment for Topps, doing large size, full color issues. The first series was something of a trial and error approach to the rest of the issues, which you really start to see as the whole set evolves. I think they realized the black back design just wasn't very attractive, and the two color red back was more attractive.

In fact, you'll discover quite a few changes made. In general, the portrait's color and vibrancy were improved for the red backs; the black backs tend to be more muted and pastel-like in their quality. And of course there is the (in)famous switched bios for the Sain and Page issues. They were definitely figuring things out, and were improving with each new series in the set. The portraits get better, they widened the white borders and enlarged the typeface of the player's name in the autograph box, and made a few other minor tweaks.

Study the cards enough, and you'll soon be able to identify the series by the portrait style. Series 1 are very watecolor, pastel-like in quality, and by the sixth series (the most beautiful in the set, and I think the greatest in all collecting) the portraits become really vibrant, almost impressionistic with fine detailing. It's really something to see how fast they master the craft, and go from being novices to masters by card 407

[Zach Wheat]

For the '52 Topps, the first time Series #1 (1-80) was printed, they used black ink. Each subsequent printing of the 1st series and each successive series thereafter was printed in both red and black ink.

ZWheat

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

While building other sets, like the '53 Topps, I usually buy raw commons and save money to apply to the star cards. The commons are nice and would be gradable if I so chose most of the time. I devote most of the money spent on sets to the stars. I buy the star cards graded from reputable sellers. Is this a smart approach for '52?? Specifically, I am referring to the high #s. Are these safe to buy raw in VGEX-EX, or do I need to treat them like star cards?

[Brianruns10]

While building other sets, like the '53 Topps, I usually buy raw commons and save money to apply to the star cards. The commons are nice and would be gradable if I so chose most of the time. I devote most of the money spent on sets to the stars. I buy the star cards graded from reputable sellers. Is this a smart approach for '52?? Specifically, I am referring to the high #s. Are these safe to buy raw in VGEX-EX, or do I need to treat them like star cards?

What it comes down to is eye appeal. Even cards in poor condition can still be nice, while cards in relatively high grades awfully ugly.

I think that's a safe grade range. The highs are a pretty safe buy in just about any grade, just focus on getting ones with honest wear, but are problem free. Stuff with holes, or creases through the middle, are junk in my opinion.

But if I had to just give one piece of advice, it'd be to buy nicely centered cards. Even low grade cards, if they're nicely centered, can resell well, and hold their value nicely. And i think it gives a nice challenge. It is really no trick to build the 52 set if you've got no scruples and just want to build a set. Even the high numbers can be had fairly afford-ably if you buy junk beaters. But it takes a little more time and effort to find centered copies. But you'll be proud when you look at those cards all lined up.

[Zach Wheat]

While building other sets, like the '53 Topps, I usually buy raw commons and save money to apply to the star cards. The commons are nice and would be gradable if I so chose most of the time. I devote most of the money spent on sets to the stars. I buy the star cards graded from reputable sellers. Is this a smart approach for '52?? Specifically, I am referring to the high #s. Are these safe to buy raw in VGEX-EX, or do I need to treat them like star cards?

Ii think this is a good strategy and you should be fine. One of the issues you should pay particular attention to is buying cards that are trimmed. It is difficult to tell with raw cards without having them in hand.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Thank for the input, guys. That is what I have done with the 53 set. I have largely avoided creases, wrinkles, stains, holes, markings, etc. I have learned to live with honest wear. I am in the process of upgrading a few 53s that didn't measure up. I do have a couple that need to be replaced due to centering. It's funny what a learning process it becomes as you build a vintage set over a few years! Centering wasn't something I thought a lot about a few years ago, but now I pass on cards all the time because of it. Brian is right when he says that centering can help compensate for other problems a card has. I plan on being done (again) with that soon and turning my full focus to 52 Topps. Even with a set as pricey as 52, I will not buy junk. At least for me, that defeats the purpose. Much like I did with 53, I will try to stay in the mid-grade range. Zach made a point that I have thought about also: trimmed high #s. I will never be able to buy them in person where I live. I suppose I am ok with buying them online as long as I know the seller and they have a refund policy in case they don't "measure up."

I have tried to ignore the impulse to go after this set, but I can't quit looking at them! We have a great hobby.

[Brianruns10]

Another bit of advice: stay consistent. The greater challenge of building a set is uniformity of quality. It's the selection process. It's not collecting when you just buy willy nilly to fill holes...that's just accumulating. And I always cringe when I see a set offered for sale on ebay or elsewhere that is just all over the map, ranging from nicely centered, PSA 6-7s, to raw beaters. Or I hate seeing a set that's all PSA 6s, and then has a star card that is a 1 and looks like a 0.

Before you start, you should figure out what grade range is realistic for your budget, and stick to it. Avoid getting cards that fall below it, and (this is harder) avoid cards that fall ABOVE it.

My 52 topps set is a median PSA 6 set. I'll dip to a 5 in the case of a star card or a high number, and for the commons I'll go up to a 7. I have a couple of 7.5s, but that was only because the price was too good. I have only one 8 in the set and that's because I raw card I bought nabbed the grade. I've never bought an 8, not because I couldn't have done it, but because it just wouldn't fit right now with the set I'm building. Eventually I'll start upgrading cards, but for the time being, I'm concerned with building a set of uniform quality, and with an emphasis on centering and original quality - gloss, unfaded colors, sharp color registration.

[ALR-bishop]

...and stay focused...on something

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Another bit of advice: stay consistent. The greater challenge of building a set is uniformity of quality. It's the selection process. It's not collecting when you just buy willy nilly to fill holes...that's just accumulating. And I always cringe when I see a set offered for sale on ebay or elsewhere that is just all over the map, ranging from nicely centered, PSA 6-7s, to raw beaters. Or I hate seeing a set that's all PSA 6s, and then has a star card that is a 1 and looks like a 0.

Before you start, you should figure out what grade range is realistic for your budget, and stick to it. Avoid getting cards that fall below it, and (this is harder) avoid cards that fall ABOVE it.

My 52 topps set is a median PSA 6 set. I'll dip to a 5 in the case of a star card or a high number, and for the commons I'll go up to a 7. I have a couple of 7.5s, but that was only because the price was too good. I have only one 8 in the set and that's because I raw card I bought nabbed the grade. I've never bought an 8, not because I couldn't have done it, but because it just wouldn't fit right now with the set I'm building. Eventually I'll start upgrading cards, but for the time being, I'm concerned with building a set of uniform quality, and with an emphasis on centering and original quality - gloss, unfaded colors, sharp color registration.

I hear you loud and clear and agree. This is something I have thought about in regard to dealing with this set. For the most part, I would like to stay in the same 4-6.5 range I did with '53. This would go for the raw commons I would buy as well...no beaters!! I would like to do it in higher grade, but that's probably my limit. Mostly raw commons, graded stars...

I guess I struggle with patience and have to be mindful of that and not make bad decisions and create inconsistencies within the sets. I truly appreciate the insight you all offer.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Advice
...and stay focused...on something

Believe me, I would love to....that wasn't a problem while working on the '53 Topps. Since, however, I find that I want it all from 1952 to 1958 Topps. As I think more seriously about '52, I pause and think I could more easily handle those other sets. I think they are great, but '52 is incredible. Basically, my choice is '52 or everything else....

[CamaroDMD]

Another bit of advice: stay consistent. The greater challenge of building a set is uniformity of quality. It's the selection process. It's not collecting when you just buy willy nilly to fill holes...that's just accumulating. And I always cringe when I see a set offered for sale on ebay or elsewhere that is just all over the map, ranging from nicely centered, PSA 6-7s, to raw beaters. Or I hate seeing a set that's all PSA 6s, and then has a star card that is a 1 and looks like a 0.

Before you start, you should figure out what grade range is realistic for your budget, and stick to it. Avoid getting cards that fall below it, and (this is harder) avoid cards that fall ABOVE it.

My 52 topps set is a median PSA 6 set. I'll dip to a 5 in the case of a star card or a high number, and for the commons I'll go up to a 7. I have a couple of 7.5s, but that was only because the price was too good. I have only one 8 in the set and that's because I raw card I bought nabbed the grade. I've never bought an 8, not because I couldn't have done it, but because it just wouldn't fit right now with the set I'm building. Eventually I'll start upgrading cards, but for the time being, I'm concerned with building a set of uniform quality, and with an emphasis on centering and original quality - gloss, unfaded colors, sharp color registration.

I think this is great advice and sort of what I was thinking when I first started thinking about this project. To me "eye appeal" is far more important than grade. I want good centering and nice color. I'm shooting for the 4-6 grade range (but if I find a 7 at the right price I will jump on it though). But, no beaters. I would rather save and search for the right piece. I would rather find a nicely centered 4 than an off center 6. I have picked up a couple commons at this point with this in mind.

Here is an example of one of the commons I have picked up. I think the centering is very nice on this card...and the color is still quite vivid. There are some marks on it...but I think it has a nice look. Definitely some hard hits on the corners, but no wrinkling or creasing into the card itself. This is the kind of card I am looking for or a little better.

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b97/RichieB16/163StanRojekPSA4_zps22a62170.jpg (http://s17.photobucket.com/user/RichieB16/media/163StanRojekPSA4_zps22a62170.jpg.html)

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Nice choice! That is pretty much the strategy I would use, too. Very presentable, affordable card. How are you planning on storing/displaying your '52s?

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

So, you are buying graded and cracking out? What's your plans for the star cards?

[CamaroDMD]

I'm going to buy all graded and keep them that way. I will probably store them in a box for now. I haven't decided how I'm going to display them.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Just asking because I am wanting to transition from boxes to binders...maybe a toploaderbinder. But I would have some graded cards and raw commons. Not sure how this would work...

[CamaroDMD]

I'm not sure of any way to store graded cards other than in a box. If some kind of binder existed...I would be interested. But, I can't imagine it would hold too many cards.