Condition perils of early 70's cards

[jchcollins]

I don't know why, but for some reason a few months ago when I decided to focus in more a bit on 1970 through about '73 Topps cards - I thought I would have an easier time finding affordable cards with less obvious condition issues. Boy was I wrong. Is it just me, or did QC at Topps noticeably go down after the 1960's? Sure, it is easier to find cards with sharp corners in the '72 set than with 1956, but here is a list of various and sundry other issues that I've found (mainly '72 Topps is going to be my example because they seem to be the worst...) that I wasn't necessarily expecting:

1. Horrible centering. This was no surprise, but gosh did it get worse in the '70s?
2. Centered cards, but ones with sneaky diamond cut or extreme tilt issues upon second glance. I got burned on a '72 Carew that had the latter but for some reason was still graded a PSA 8. Also I have a slightly diamond-cut '73 Schmidt - it doesn't really bother me, but it's there. I went online and looked at the PSA 5 and 6 Schmidt RC's for comparison - and more than half of them had some degree of that issue.
3. Edge dings! The borders on '72 and '73 Topps seem particularly fragile - say in comparison to another set with white borders - like '65 Topps. Even cards that are otherwise in super high grade can have an easy to miss edge ding if you aren't being careful. Older sets it seems to me that the white borders are smoother and glossed better or something. Some '72s and it's like the edges and corners are a thin coat of white-out that can easily be chipped away!
4. Print spots that hide until you've bought the card, and random stray ink (roller marks?) and other common PD issues, like fish-eyes. Unless it's really bad, TPG's seem to go pretty easy on the fish-eye type things, but still - they are noticeable.
5. Card stock in general just seems crappier - and thinner. I've noticed that in comparison to other issues, 1972 Topps cards often slide around noticeably in their PSA holders. A trait which usually quickly earns their liberation from those holders when in my collection.

On the whole I'm not complaining because this timeframe is still cheper for me in collecting than say - '62 Topps. And by my own description I'm not a "high grade" collector. But I will admit the condition issues I've continually stumbled upon in terms of what I see for the grade have been eye-opening and a bit unexpected.

[ALBB]

Oh, yea...those print spots..dots...whatever they are....you see a lot of that in 73 and 74 …. I guess Topps figured - " who cares...where else the kids gonna buy baseball cards " !

[Vintagevault13]

Couldn’t agree more. I am in the process of upgrading approx. 50 cards for my 1974 set due to the “spots”. I have tried to convince myself they are no big deal, but they drive me crazy! This is a HUGE problem for the 1975 set. These print dots/spots were the sole reason I chose to build my 75 set one card at a time. It was initially more expensive, but I knew I would have to upgrade 1/3- 1/2 of the set if I bought lots or a complete set.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Rickyy]

Yeah the 72 tilt issues bug me a lot....I ended up upgrading several times on some cards as I built up my loose set. Nolan Ryan...ugh must have bought 4 or 5 until I got one I liked....

Ricky Y

[jchcollins]

Yeah the 72 tilt issues bug me a lot....I ended up upgrading several times on some cards as I built up my loose set. Nolan Ryan...ugh must have bought 4 or 5 until I got one I liked....



Ricky Y


I hear you there. On my ‘72 Ryan I took a decently centered card with no tilt over many other things. The one I ended up with was only an SGC 4, but to me at least looked better than many other 6 and higher cards which had the tilt problems.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Exhibitman]

Easier? Not with these designs.

1970, 1971 and 1975 have those full-bleed color borders, plus the ubiquitous Topps poor centering.

I am convinced that the stock on 1973 cards is softer than on other years. They seem to get corner wear from the breeze. Add in the full bleed black back borders and you have a tough card to find in top condition.

My theory on the 1972s is that the designs themselves on certain cards are not perfectly squared off so they tend to look diamond cut regardless. That said, the asymmetrical design T-B makes it easier to tolerate off-centered cards that way. There are some cards that are just about always found o/c L-R. Finding a nice Aaron IA card, for example, is a challenge for centering. The thinner borders than other years also make the o/c more glaring.

1974 seems to be fisheye and print mark heaven.

[jchcollins]

My theory on the 1972s is that the designs themselves on certain cards are not perfectly squared off so they tend to look diamond cut regardless. That said, the asymmetrical design T-B makes it easier to tolerate off-centered cards that way.


The #595 Ryan is ridiculous. Since we were talking about it, I went and looked again thinking maybe I could upgrade - and 9 out of 10 of those cards on eBay right now have the tilt issue. Even some of the PSA 9’s out there for sale have it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ALBB]

what about this 1974 Topps Mike Philipps , take a look....its seems very hard to find in dead centered

[pokerplyr80]

It wasn't any better in the 50s or 60s. Almost any specific card I've tried to track down is hard to find dead centered. Some were harder than others, but none were easy. Unless I just bought them from another collector who focuses on centering.

[jchcollins]

It wasn't any better in the 50s or 60s. Almost any specific card I've tried to track down is hard to find dead centered. Some were harder than others, but none were easy. Unless I just bought them from another collector who focuses on centering.

50's cards don't seem to have the tilt / diamond cut issues en masse that Topps began to experience in the 1970's. Also the card stock was thicker and of higher quality in the 50's.

[Fuddjcal]

50's cards don't seem to have the tilt / diamond cut issues en masse that Topps began to experience in the 1970's. Also the card stock was thicker and of higher quality in the 50's.

everything was good in the 50's followed by everything being dog S**t in the 70's and 80's.

[Exhibitman]

Well I wouldn't go that far...

[jchcollins]

50's and early 60's cards were definitely thicker. I think this is why some of them hold up better at least as far as eye-appeal goes even in lower grades. And if you use those Ultra-Pro mag cases, the older cards won't slip and slide around in them the way say - a '72 Topps card will.

I think it's hard to say the '70s were total crap overall due to the cool designs - but imagine how nice they would be if they had the card stock of say - '57 Topps?

[JollyElm]

It's funny if you think about it. The 'only' reason the overproduced cards from the 60's and 70's are coveted by most of us is because Topps' quality control sucked. There are 8 billion 1972 Nolan Ryan cards out there, but trying to find one centered and/or without the ubiquitous tilt is hard as hell. Can you even imagine if every single '72 Ryan Express was printed correctly...and centered perfectly? They would have all the appeal of a 1988 Topps common.

[jchcollins]

It's funny if you think about it. The 'only' reason the overproduced cards from the 60's and 70's are coveted by most of us is because Topps' quality control sucked. There are 8 billion 1972 Nolan Ryan cards out there, but trying to find one centered and/or without the ubiquitous tilt is hard as hell. Can you even imagine if every single '72 Ryan Express was printed correctly...and centered perfectly? They would have all the appeal of a 1988 Topps common.

That card particularly has always been intriguing to me. At the height of the "Ryan Express" mania in the early 90's, my LCS had a '72 Ryan that they wanted like $150 for and I couldn't afford it. (I settled for - and cherished for a long time - a very o/c '73 Ryan that I could afford). Looking back that '72 was an ok card, but I don't think it was NM or anything. I first became aware of the card and the airbrushed hat job as a kid probably a few years earlier when Johnny Bench's "Great American Baseball Quiz" on ESPN featured it talking about the trade of Ryan for Fregosi. Was not able to score a copy until I was an adult collector, but it's weird now because I always think of it as a high-dollar card because of that - and of course it's not, really...

[onlyvintage62]

everything was good in the 50's followed by everything being dog S**t in the 70's and 80's.

From what I have heard (from people who worked there at the time) was that Topps was in severe financial distress. This led to poor (cheaper) paper and cutting corners in every conceivable way.

The flood in 72 did not help either with all of the damage.

Also lets not forget they had no competition..and a captive audience.

[steve B]

From what I have heard (from people who worked there at the time) was that Topps was in severe financial distress. This led to poor (cheaper) paper and cutting corners in every conceivable way.

The flood in 72 did not help either with all of the damage.

Also lets not forget they had no competition..and a captive audience.


That could be part of it.

I know they cut corners in some pretty cool ways, like using cardstock with the card backs printed to make boxes for Bazooka gum.

[KCRfan1]

The 1977 Topps cards are on thinner stock and prone to chipping on the front. VERY tough set to collect in high grade. I am currently working on a '73 set, and it's taking time to find centered cards even more so in the high numbers.

[jchcollins]

The 1977 Topps cards are on thinner stock and prone to chipping on the front. VERY tough set to collect in high grade. I am currently working on a '73 set, and it's taking time to find centered cards even more so in the high numbers.

'77 is my birth year, and a decade or more ago I had a NM set. Wish I had kept it.