What is the rarest topps high numbers ?

[Rookiemonster]

What year do you think is the lowest short print high number ? I guess I'll add between the 50s and 60s . As a personal favorite I like the 61s . But how rare are they ?

[mrmopar]

I do not know the answer, but it seems that even beat up copies of the 66 Shirley/Jackson sell for crazy prices. besides the Ken McMullen RC that I still need thanks to Pete Rose, that Shirley is another gap in my Dodger team sets that I may never fill. I just can't bring myself to even consider paying that much for what is essentially a common, albeit a SP/Hi Number.

[ALR-bishop]

Topps 1952 Tony Bartirome :)

[irv]

Topps 1952 Tony Bartirome :)


For sure! lol

[brian1961]

Dustin, I think each year Topps did much less of their last series, after what transpired with their landmark 1952 set and its last series "disaster" for them, and later, for us. Just think, if somehow Topps had held on to all those unsold cases of 1952 high numbers, rather than dispatching Sy Berger to take them on a skow and dump them in the Atlantic. However, Sy obeyed orders.

Too bad.

Back to your question. I think for us who collected back then (for me, 1961 - 1973) it depended upon where you lived, and if any of your regular card outlets decided to order boxes of the last series. Also, if other kids got to them before me, and bought them all out. Finally, if I was able to be there at the market with my mother to select them, I had a chance. During 66-67, I simply ordered them through the mail from The Trading Card Company, in Farmington Hills, Michigan.

My personal favorite of the high numbers is also the 1961, the first year I began collecting baseball cards. For a number of reasons, I only got one pack of the 7th series. I loved how the cards looked that year, and Topps had so many interesting sub-sets, as well as multi-player cards. They should have done an "M & M BOYS" of Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle! Every kid worth being called a baseball card collector would have bought packs like crazy just to have gotten that card! It should have been made, but was not----dumb.

Finally, especially with respect to PSA / SGC high-grade survivors, their rarity depends upon how many of the few collectors that saved unopened boxes from that year opened them and had the best specimens graded. Moreso whether or not any finds of unsold stock occurred once the organized adult hobby began from 1969.

Once the landmark Mr. Mint find of 1952 Topps semi-high and high numbers occurred in about 1986, everyone in the hobby, as well as many other non-hobby people due to the mainstream media attention from the find, were on the look-out for any cases or wax and cello boxes of old trading cards of ANY kind. Those few finds were in all likelihood the source of the future PSA 8s, 9s, and 10s.

I don't know what your objective is, but high numbers have always made for interesting discussion and great sea stories.:D ---Brian Powell

[Rookiemonster]

Dustin, I think each year Topps did much less of their last series, after what transpired with their landmark 1952 set and its last series "disaster" for them, and later, for us. Just think, if somehow Topps had held on to all those unsold cases of 1952 high numbers, rather than dispatching Sy Berger to take them on a skow and dump them in the Atlantic. However, Sy obeyed orders.

Too bad.

Back to your question. I think for us who collected back then (for me, 1961 - 1973) it depended upon where you lived, and if any of your regular card outlets decided to order boxes of the last series. Also, if other kids got to them before me, and bought them all out. Finally, if I was able to be there at the market with my mother to select them, I had a chance. During 66-67, I simply ordered them through the mail from The Trading Card Company, in Farmington Hills, Michigan.

My personal favorite of the high numbers is also the 1961, the first year I began collecting baseball cards. For a number of reasons, I only got one pack of the 7th series. I loved how the cards looked that year, and Topps had so many interesting sub-sets. as well as multi-player cards. They should have done an "M & M BOYS" of Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle! Every kid worth being called a baseball card collector would have bought packs like crazy just to have gotten that card! It should have been made, but was not----dumb.

Finally, especially with respect to PSA / SGC high-grade survivors, their rarity depends upon how many of the few collectors that saved unopened boxes from that year opened them and had the best specimens graded. Moreso whether or not any finds of unsold stock occurred once the organized adult hobby began from 1969.

Once the landmark Mr. Mint find of 1952 Topps high numbers occurred in about 1986, everyone in the hobby, as well as many other non-hobby people due to the mainstream media attention from the find, were on the look-out for any cases or wax and cello boxes of old trading cards of ANY kind. Those few finds were in all likelihood the source of the future PSA 8s, 9s, and 10s.

I don't know what your objective is, but high numbers have always made for interesting discussion and great sea stories.:D ---Brian Powell

Thanks ! Well I was thinking of trying to put together the 1961 high# all stars I have a pretty nice Mays from it . So it got me thinking ...... How rare is this card ? How rare are other high #s?

[brian1961]

Well Dustin, the 1961 Topps Sporting News all-stars are indeed a cool-looking assemblage of the game's best at that moment. The dazzling design was the company's best effort among their all-star subsets over the years, though they were all usually beautiful. For 1961, Topps seemed to select stellar photos of the stars. They all have a slightly dark appearance, with a dark background, creating a nice contrast to the strong white newspaper backdrop.

You specifically mention the Willie Mays all-star, and this is simply one of the most gratifying of all Say Hey cards. What a glowing smile! Looks "a million times" more attractive than Willie's regular Topps card, where his surly countenance is revolting, at best.

As far as rarity, which refers mostly to what exists today, or what survived over the years, I would urge you to consult PSA's population report. It will provide you with a good idea of what the most significant and important third party authenticator has handled in their nearly 25 years of existence. Since you seem to be enthused to build this subset, get on eBay and look at what is available today. Prominent dealers will have a nice selection for you to choose from.

The '61 high numbers are not frighteningly rare, but in ultra high PSA grade, they can be very, very tough. Furthermore, there's lots of competition for them, particularly if the specimen is well-centered to perfectly-centered. The gents who are vying for a respectable position on the PSA 1961 Topps Set Registry have their sights zeroed in on ANY high-grade specimens they still need. Two names come to my mind that are ferociously tough and you will have to face down the most wicked auction dogfight of your life should a PSA 9 MINT come on the block---Jim Gentile and Bob Cerv. The fact they're both exquisite-looking cards compounds the situation. Same would also go for PSA 8 examples of those guys that are centered. Oh brother. A third name came to my mind of a genuine toughie--young Yanks' pitcher Rollie Sheldon.

Fellow collectors, please correct me if my memory has become toasted on the Topps '61 high numbers, for the benefit of Justin, myself, and anyone else who may be pausing to read this thread.

Cheers.:D ---Brian Powell

[Exhibitman]

1955/56 Hocus Focus. Per Topps guru David Hornish: "a number of subjects between 97 and 126 remain unknown. Still missing are a subject for #110 (its existence is known from an old auction) and anything at all about numbers 97, 98, 100, 101, 108, 109, 111, 117, 119, 120, 122, 124 & 125. I can't think of too many Topps sets with holes in their checklists at this point and certainly none that are cards (Topps issued a few sets of things in the 60's and 70's that were more toys than cards and some are not fully documented)."

http://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/search/label/1955%20Topps%20Hocus%20Focus

[Rookiemonster]

Picture of the front

[Rookiemonster]

Back

[Rookiemonster]

Well Dustin, the 1961 Topps Sporting News all-stars are indeed a cool-looking assemblage of the game's best at that moment. The dazzling design was the company's best effort among their all-star subsets over the years, though they were all usually beautiful. For 1961, Topps seemed to select stellar photos of the stars. They all have a slightly dark appearance, with a dark background, creating a nice contrast to the strong white newspaper backdrop.

You specifically mention the Willie Mays all-star, and this is simply one of the most gratifying of all Say Hey cards. What a glowing smile! Looks "a million times" more attractive than Willie's regular Topps card, where his surly countenance is revolting, at best.

As far as rarity, which refers mostly to what exists today, or what survived over the years, I would urge you to consult PSA's population report. It will provide you with a good idea of what the most significant and important third party authenticator has handled in their nearly 25 years of existence. Since you seem to be enthused to build this subset, get on eBay and look at what is available today. Prominent dealers will have a nice selection for you to choose from.

The '61 high numbers are not frighteningly rare, but in ultra high PSA grade, they can be very, very tough. Furthermore, there's lots of competition for them, particularly if the specimen is well-centered to perfectly-centered. The gents who are vying for a respectable position on the PSA 1961 Topps Set Registry have their sights zeroed in on ANY high-grade specimens they still need. Two names come to my mind that are ferociously tough and you will have to face down the most wicked auction dogfight of your life should a PSA 9 MINT come on the block---Jim Gentile and Bob Cerv. The fact they're both exquisite-looking cards compounds the situation. Same would also go for PSA 8 examples of those guys that are centered. Oh brother. A third name came to my mind of a genuine toughie--young Yanks' pitcher Rollie Sheldon.

Fellow collectors, please correct me if my memory has become toasted on the Topps '61 high numbers, for the benefit of Justin, myself, and anyone else who may be pausing to read this thread.

Cheers.:D ---Brian Powell

I have to agree with that the Mays is a great pic of him . When I seen this card I had something else in mind packs/boxes . But I kept going back to it like or I could buy this . I chose the Mays and still had some cash left over for packs . It is a card in my collection that I feel like I made the right chose .


@exhibitman I'll have to look in to those I don't think I ever seen one .

[brian1961]

Dustin, again, congratulations on your beautiful Willie Mays 1961 Topps All-Star card. While not quite well-centered, it's very decent nonetheless, and the all-important picture looks dazzling, with the key factors right-on. I refer to the crisp picture registry, and an absence of any lousy print dots, etc.

You really have a nice card there, my friend. If you decide to get the Mays graded, go to PSA grading. Their web site will inform you in no uncertain terms of how to submit it to them for grading. While it is a hassle, and they are harsh graders, you will be very pleased with a graded card of your new gem.:D

Wishing you the very best, my friend. Thanks for sharing with us. --Brian Powell

[ls7plus]

Delete

[Rookiemonster]

Thanks Brian ! Still trying to figure out if there is a rarer topps high# . I'll check psa I'm just worried that maybe a not so popular set would have the least submission .

[NateMack]

I think the 66 and 67 SPs are the toughest to find, followed by the 62 rookie parades and the 61 high numbers. Just my opinion. Of course any of these are easy to find with an unlimited budget...

52 highs are not under consideration for me...

[Rookiemonster]

How rare is the 1953 topps Willie mays ?

[BillP]

I think the 66 and 67 SPs are the toughest to find, followed by the 62 rookie parades and the 61 high numbers. Just my opinion. Of course any of these are easy to find with an unlimited budget...

52 highs are not under consideration for me...

As a collector of late 50's/60's sets, I'll go with these:

1966 card #591 Jackson rc - just because it's out of control
1967 card #605 - Shannon - centered
1962 card #572 - had tough time with it.
1959 card #512 - Bob Gibson rc - underrated

[ALR-bishop]

Adam mentioned the 55 and 56 Hocus Focus sets. I assume most would not count then because they involve only a baseball subset. But having done all the Topps sets I do agree with he and Mr Hornish that those two sets are the hardest Topps issued at retail sets to complete. Most likely because they were ugly, small, poorly developed, poorly cut and flimsy. Other than that they were great .

I have finished the 56s but am still 2 short on the 55s

[Harliduck]

As a collector of late 50's/60's sets, I'll go with these:

1966 card #591 Jackson rc - just because it's out of control
1967 card #605 - Shannon - centered
1962 card #572 - had tough time with it.
1959 card #512 - Bob Gibson rc - underrated



Hard to argue those are tough..especially a centered Shannon...I have three and only one is somewhat sort of centered...lol.

I do remember putting together my 66 set that there were times when #570 Mahaffey and #555 Perranoski literally had ZERO examples of any kind on Ebay. That is a rare feat itself. I actually got those cards off an old dealer who lurks this sight and lived near me. He emailed me with a killer deal on 10 or so EXNM 66 highs that I immediately gobbled up (Grant rookie included). I still owe this site and that gentleman for that find...about 4 years ago...


EDIT to add that I just looked at Ebay and there are indeed examples of #570 and #555 up now...just crazy at the time.

[BillP]

Thx John, as far as the 66 highs go, Peranoski is always off center L to R, and Willie Davis #535 top to bottom. And I'll go further to say, as I have before, that the very tough Sp's: Clarke, Coleman, Tigers, #544, #591 are diamond cut a lot. So finding those centered should have been in the top 5. I still say that the 66 Sp's were printed on multiple different sheets with these 5 and a few others by themselves on 1 sheet. p
Off on a tangent here, but I like to here opinions on the 66 highs.

bill

[mikemb]

Thx John, as far as the 66 highs go, Peranoski is always off center L to R, and Willie Davis #535 top to bottom. And I'll go further to say, as I have before, that the very tough Sp's: Clarke, Coleman, Tigers, #544, #591 are diamond cut a lot. So finding those centered should have been in the top 5. I still say that the 66 Sp's were printed on multiple different sheets with these 5 and a few others by themselves on 1 sheet. p
Off on a tangent here, but I like to here opinions on the 66 highs.

bill

Bill -

I also love the 66 high numbers. It is not the best picture, but here is my uncut partial proof sheet of 12 high numbers, including some SP's.


http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q273/mikemb_photos/20160826_180758_zpsoxmvp5ff.jpg (http://s138.photobucket.com/user/mikemb_photos/media/20160826_180758_zpsoxmvp5ff.jpg.html)

The Lindblad/Stone Rookie card does not have their positions listed.

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q273/mikemb_photos/20140420_173220%202_zpsqpmoixie.jpg (http://s138.photobucket.com/user/mikemb_photos/media/20140420_173220%202_zpsqpmoixie.jpg.html)

Mike

[BearBailey]

I agree with the 66's being the hardest, followed by 67, 62, then 61 but don't think those 61's are nearly as hard, not easy but not as hard. 1952 is highly sought after but with an unlimited budget are much easier to find than any of those 4 60's sets. I remember it taking over a year to finish the last 5 cards in that 1966 set, every Willow Grove show and th e National couldn't find them and then finally got lucky at a show where a guy was breaking a complete set, lucky until he told me the price of those 5 "commons" but finished the hunt.

[redalpha7]

For me I had tough time finding 1966 Horace Clarke in decent condition at a good price. Especially hard since I am a Red Sox fan