1952 Topps 1-310, is it considered complete?

[jasonc]

Because of the tough high numbers do you consider 1952 Topps 1-310 Complete (Just the low series) providing you want to stop it at that and are satisfied with that.

If I ever collect this set, thats probably the route I would go. Not so much of the J.Robinson, Campenella, Mantle, but the high number commons, $100 a piece for low grade commons is probably what would turn me off.

For comparison would you be happier and feel like you accomplished something by completing 1-310 in 1952 Topps, or would a 1953, 1954 COMPLETE set be more satisfying to you.

Who here is just going after 1-310 and then calling it complete? In contrast, who is going for 1-407?

[brewing]

I'm going for 1-310 plus a few key cards. Mantle, Robinson, Campy, and Mathews.

I agree the $100 per card commons turn me off from pursuing it.

[HRBAKER]

I would say collect it the way you want - but 1-310 is not a complete 1952 Topps set.

[hangman62]

I completed the 1952T set as a short set ..1-310, it was quite a challenge never the less, and I was thrilled just to get that far.......ended up tiring of it and sold it a few yrs ago

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by brewing

I'm going for 1-310 plus a few key cards. Mantle, Robinson, Campy, and Mathews.

I agree the $100 per card commons turn me off from pursuing it.

Same here

[1963Topps Set]

The complete 1952 Topps set is 407 cards, nothing less.

[begsu1013]

Originally Posted by 1963topps set

the complete 1952 topps set is 407 cards, nothing less.

+407

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

I would say collect it the way you want - but 1-310 is not a complete 1952 Topps set.

+1

[GoldenAge50s]

When I was a young collector 1-250 was a complete set! In my area of WNY we never saw any other series & for many years I thought I had them all!

[KCRfan1]

I have about 50 of the cards in very nice condition, including 3 hi's. Even $30-40 for commons in the low series can become expensive after a while. It's doubtful that I ever put 1-310 together and I'm content to keep the cards I have. So, I have moved on to other sets that I can actually complete. A set for me would be 1-407.

[Zach Wheat]

407 is a complete set but 1 thru 310 is one heck of a nice subset and a nice accomplishment as well. I am less than 20 from completing the set.....and probably will go after the major variations. I was fortunate, having purchased most of my hi numbers when they weren't too expensive. I wish I had the knowledge and foresight to obtain the mid series gray backs!

Z Wheat

[Volod]

Originally Posted by GoldenAge50s

When I was a young collector 1-250 was a complete set! In my area of WNY we never saw any other series & for many years I thought I had them all!

Say, Fred - If you don't mind my asking, what town(s) in WNY and, if you can recall, what retailers were you looking in for 1952 Topps cards? It is of some interest to me, because, as a tyke, I never could find 1952 Topps cards in any of the stores in my old hometown of Auburn, NY. Plenty of Bowman, but the only '52 Topps I saw were in the collections of obnoxious little rich kids who were able to trek to NYC to do their gumcard shopping.

[baseballfan]

I am 4 away from the low number portion but I agree the set is 407. I have a couple of high numbers In Lesser condition, I'll keep trying to pick up high numbers as I can and I really want a mantle. I got nothing but time to work on it.
Great set

[1963Topps Set]

Originally Posted by baseballfan

I am 4 away from the low number portion but I agree the set is 407. I have a couple of high numbers In Lesser condition, I'll keep trying to pick up high numbers as I can and I really want a mantle. I got nothing but time to work on it.
Great set

Same here bro. I hear you!

[GoldenAge50s]

Originally Posted by Volod

Say, Fred - If you don't mind my asking, what town(s) in WNY and, if you can recall, what retailers were you looking in for 1952 Topps cards? It is of some interest to me, because, as a tyke, I never could find 1952 Topps cards in any of the stores in my old hometown of Auburn, NY. Plenty of Bowman, but the only '52 Topps I saw were in the collections of obnoxious little rich kids who were able to trek to NYC to do their gumcard shopping.

Hi Steve---

I grew up in Attica ('46-'53) & moved to the Southern Tier (Wellsville) in 1953 thru HS in 1958. I looked for & bought cards from Buffalo to Wellsville & small towns in between. Most cards were found in Mom & Pop grocery/variety stores, drugstores like Rexall or independents & the "Five & Dime" stores (JJ Newberry, Woolworth, Kresge's)

When we went on summer vacations I looked for cards (Exhibits in machines in Atlantic City on the Boardwalk, Bowmans in their home in Philadelphia, various places in NY City, stores in Florida, etc, etc.

Every place had Bowman & I found Red & Blue Back & Connie Mack Topps in
1951 & in '52 Topps were just about everywhere too, but NEVER did I find any ABOVE #250! Didn't even know they existed until years later!

By 1953 Topps were easier to find & I put the whole set together w/ no problem! (Still have them!)

Over the yrs I have heard that '52 Highs were found often in Canada, but they sure never trickled down to the Buffalo/WNY area!

[Volod]

Originally Posted by GoldenAge50s

Every place had Bowman & I found Red & Blue Back & Connie Mack Topps in
1951 & in '52 Topps were just about everywhere too, but NEVER did I find any ABOVE #250! Didn't even know they existed until years later!

By 1953 Topps were easier to find & I put the whole set together w/ no problem! (Still have them!)

Over the yrs I have heard that '52 Highs were found often in Canada, but they sure never trickled down to the Buffalo/WNY area!

Thanks for the info, Fred - I also was flummoxed by the absence of Topps cards in my town. After seeing some '52's in other kids possession, usually drastically trimmed to match the size of the Bowman issue that year, I embarked on a search of all the mom & pops and downtown department stores, trying to find them, but could not. Like you, i had no difficulty finding Topps 1951 (except for the Blue issues) and 1953 sets, but it seems that the '52's had very spotty distribution in upstate NY. It wasn't until i began collecting again in the early '80's that i put together a complete set, which, like any other set, has to be the full number of cards, but not necessarily the variations, in my view.

[autograf]

I did 1-310 with 1-80 in BOTH red and black. And I have 23 high numbers. I love them but it'll never be complete till all 407 #'s are represented. Will I get there? I hope....someday. Love the set. Just did that in the last year and a half or so.

[SMPEP]

In my book ... not a full set until you have the grey backs ... and I'd trade my high numbers all day long for grey backs.

Now if I could only find those grey backs!!!

Patrick

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

In my book ... not a full set until you have the grey backs ... and I'd trade my high numbers all day long for grey backs.

You can put the "normal set" together any day of the week 1-407!

Now a signed set, THAT is even rarer than the gray backs...

[ALR-bishop]

Now you guys are into master set land. See if you can find hobby agreement on what actually constitutes a master or super 1952 set.

[Paul S]

I stopped when I couldn't figure out the difference between grey and gray

[ALR-bishop]

"Grays" are more "common"

[SMPEP]

Especially "Ted Gray"s.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

Especially "Ted Gray"s.

who does he think he is clogging up my searches??

[SMPEP]

Yes!!!! My search got a hit! I found one ... Damn you, Ted!

[Bigdaddy]

From my favorite movie, "We can love completely without complete understanding"

No, 1-310 is not the complete set, but you can love it completely without it being complete.

[jasonc]

Kind of what I thought, however I did discover that there are some people that are just going for the 1-310. Personally, if I was going for this, I would probably go 1-310, and maybe a few of the stars in very low grade for the high numbers. The nice thing about this hobby is you can collect how you want.

[Bestdj777]

I think what is "complete" is a somewhat of a personal decision. If I were actually collecting the set, I wouldn't consider it complete until I got all 407 with back variations, double prints, and some of the more popular variations.

At a minimum, I think you need at least one of each card in the set to actually call it complete. Collect what you like though. I got a Pafko and both Mantles. I don't recall what color the back is on my Pafko but will some day pick up the other one and that guy with all the balls. After that, it won't be a complete set but will be complete enough that I'll stop buying and move on to other things.

[ALR-bishop]

There really is not hobby consensus on what constitutes a complete...as in master...set. By some accounts it is north of 575. Admittedly some include recurring print defects in their determinations. You could use the SCD or PSA registry checklists, but there are certainly some who think those lists are incomplete. As an example, how many variants are there of the House and Campos cards ?

We have several avid collectors of the set on this board, some in this thread.

[darkhorse9]

To me..

1-407 = complete

1-310 = finished

I have no plans to collect the high numbers. I would much rather move on to another, older set. For what you would pay for the 1952 high numbers alone you could get a similarly graded run of Bowman 1948, 1949, 1950, 1951 and 1952 sets