1956 WINS!! Now its time to get Started.

[shernan30]

For those of you who send time on the Prewar side you may recognize my username. I'm and Old Judge collector that's looking to expand my collection into other prewar and postwar sets. I'm looking to start a 50's Topps sent and wanted to hear some thoughts from the postwar collectors. So here goes my BIG question:

1953 Topps or 1956 Topps?

My wife and I both collect, she's a modern card collector, with her being partial to the 1956 Topps set. I personally think the 1953 Topps is a really good looking set that has a little prewar feel to it. So, what the consensus?

Thanks,

Steven

[campyfan39]

They are two of my favorite sets of all time, def tops 5 for me.

That said, 56 is my choice. There are 340 cards and 34 are hall of famers. Easy math says that is 1 out of every10! It is also a set without high numbers and short prints.

53 is beautiful but can get pricey with the high numbers. It also missing a lot of the stars that had exclusive contracts with bowman.

Happy collecting and welcome to the other side!

ps. If your wife likes 56 its a no brainer. Might get her into the older stuff and if she is like my wife she will encourage me to spend a little more if she is involved

[brob28]

For me I'd also go with the '56 set, for all the reasons Chris stated. Visually, I think it's one of the best sets Topps produced and full of Hall of Famers. That said, hard to go wrong with either of those choices.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Another vote for '56

[brewing]

If you have the disposable income, 1953 and it's not even close. Beautiful set with a great Mantle, Mays, and sole Topps card of Satchel Paige.

1956 is a great set and it is reasonably priced in the VG-ex to EX condition.

[cdn_collector]

Between '53 and '56, I would go with '56.

The '53s look better in my opinion, but the player selection in the '56 set is what wins me over. Having Paige in the '53 set is a strong argument for it, but the '56 set has Aaron, Clemente, Koufax, Snider, Banks, Kaline and probably others.

Perhaps I should also admit that '56 Mantle is in my top 10 favourite cards of any era

Good luck whatever you choose.

Cheers,

Richard.

[Gr8Beldini]

Originally Posted by campyfan39

They are two of my favorite sets of all time, def tops 5 for me.

That said, 56 is my choice. There are 340 cards and 34 are hall of famers. Easy math says that is 1 out of every10! It is also a set without high numbers and short prints.

Agreed; and it's not just the HoFers. 56 Is loaded with non-HoF stars. Score, Minoso, Hodges, Furillo, Newcombe, Gilliam, Klu, Adcock, Dark, Kuenn, Groat, Podres, Pierce, Antonelli, Sauer, Bauer, Elston Howard, Skowron, Martin, Burdette, Konstanty, Ennis, Sievers, Piersall, Vernon, Al Rosen, and iconic cards such as Larsen, Spooner, Zimmer RC, Yankees, Dodgers, and Giants teams. For design, player selection, and reasonableness of price, '56 is the greatest set ever produced. And it is the only set with Mantle, Jackie, and Ted Williams in the same set. 53 is beautiful, but too many key players omitted because of Bowman and very expensive (though it has Satchell).

[MattyC]

Highly subjective call here but I prefer the aesthetic of the 56 set. Something about those action images and portraits just appeals to me.

[almostdone]

If this your first post war set build I would echo most others and go for the 56 set. There are some great stars to save and look for without killing yourself financially. Also you can find more of the bigger lots to buy, break up, and resell the doubles on. That way your not bogged down as much finding commons for more money each.

56 is the most star packed set ever made in my opinion. It has late in career stars like Williams, Robinson, Campy, and Feller as well as a slew of new stars that became legends like Aaron, Banks, Clemente, Koufax, Killebrew and so on. The only thing lacking in the set is a Musial but he isn't in the 53 either so that's a wash.

As far as the Mantle goes, both are classics in their own right but he won the Triple Crown in 56 so there is some significance in it.

Finally, the horizontal layout of 56 looks great in a binder, if that how you plan on storing them, with the 8 pocket pages.

All this is my opinion of course but congrats on taking the post was plunge no matter which set you choose.

Drew

[shernan30]

Thanks for all the advise. I've spent the weekend reviewing the two sets in terms of pricing, appearance, players, your comments, and input from my wife. Everything calculated leads me to.....

1956 Topps

Sticking with VG to EX grade range puts the investment of time and money where I would like to be. Since I'm looking for lower grade cards, centering will keep the pace of the set just right (based on some of my research centering varies with the 50s sets. I could be completely wrong with the centering aspect).

Now to find that starter set/group !!

[shernan30]

Is buying a "starter set" of around 100 cards a good way to get started or should I start with singles? My Old Judge set is 16 players, pretty obvious to start with one. Looking at a set +-300 cards is a little different.

[NateMack]

I always start a set with a couple big starter sets. Often times you can get a few star players lumped into the starter to make it more appealing to buyers. I dont start buying singles until the last 10-20% of a set, but all the time stay on the lookout for the big cards.

[shernan30]

Around the VG-EX to EX range. Mostly raw, but the HOFers that are a bigger investment will be slabbed.