![]() |
Last card - 1965 Topps completed
The picture is is the LAST card that I needed to complete my 1965 Topps set. It arrived today from COMC and I snapped a pic before I put it in the binder. I have been working on this set for 18 months. 1965 is my birth year and my goal was to complete the set before I turned 50. Mission accomplished!http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/08...c3649d2d6a.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Congrats on completion of the set. What is next in line to work on?
|
Many congrats, youngster!
|
Congratulations Ed! That's a great set.
Let me ask you, who are your three favorite cards in the set, and why? This set is the only virtually complete set I have left from my childhood. I collected the 1965 set when I was 10-11 years old. My own personal favorite is Mel Stottlemyre. The high numbers were very hard to locate. I never came across them until my mom and I were visiting a town we used to live in. I begged her to stop at the Ben Franklin 5 & 10, one of my two favorite places to find baseball cards. They had the seventh series! She bought me a bunch of packs. I must have hugged and thanked her a dozen times. For some reason, the Mel Stottlemyre really stood out to me. At the time, he was the Yankees' budding new star, and Topps gave him the prime number of 550. His pose, with the camera angled slightly up on Mel, was so compelling to me. Anyway, Mel won 20 games for the dying Yanks that year, and I always regarded that card as a personal favorite. Would love to hear of your favorites, Ed. Way da go, bro, on finishing the 1965 Topps baseball!:D ---Brian Powell |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
1965
Congrats, Ed on finishing 65 and good hunting on the 52s
65 & 75...why 52 and not 55 ? |
Yeah, Ed, the Mel Stottlemyre card is a bear to find centered. I can see mine in my mind---way off to one side. I always try to find the sunny side of life, and just focus on Mel. It's like the title of one of my favorite teen songs of '71, Ringo Starr's "IT DON'T COME EASY".
Here's wishin' you the best on your quest to tackle Topps's Giant card bruiser. Have a great weekend, collector bro. ---Brian Powell |
Quote:
Al, To be honest, collecting 1955 Topps would probably make more sense for many reasons (prices, great rookies, smaller #). I definitely considered that possibility. I always come back to the 52's. As a kid, the 1952 set just seemed mythical and unattainable to me. I have always enjoyed history, and reading about the 1952 set when I was young established it in my mind as "the set". Trust me, I have often tried to talk myself out of it. In fact, this is the third time I have begun the 1952 set. The other two times I sold the cards I had, except for my HOFers. No matter what, I keep coming back to these cards. I guess I am just fascinated with the set, even with all of it's flaws (pricey, lots of no-names and coaches). Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
Congrats on the 65 set completion. 65 is a great set.
|
'65 Topps Set
Congrats Ed. What an accomplishment. Just curious as to your impression of how dififcult it was to obtain the hi nums versus another set like the 67's...
Z |
Quote:
This is the only 60's set I have completed so I don't have personal experience with the high #s from other set.s. For my 65 set, I didn't find the high #s terribly difficult. The toughest I recall were Mel Stottlemyre, Bob Uecker, and Jesus Alou. Most high # commons were readily available in the $3-6 range for VG-EX. Many of the hi # rookie cards were a little tough to find at a good price. There is a good crop of rookies in the 65 set. I had to especially be patient with the Steve Carlton, Catfish Hunter, Tony Perez and Tug McGraw rookie cards. From what I have read about the 1967's, the 1965 high numbers are definitely easier. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
Congrats, Ed. '65 is a beautiful set, I love the Yaz in that set.
I'm getting pretty close to the completion of the '57 set...I highly recommend that one! |
Quote:
|
Great job completing the set! I love the way the Cardinals cards look in this set too. Good luck with the 52 Topps!
Scott |
65
I love the 65 set! Congrats! It is one of the best 60s sets and you don't even need to fuss fuss with the other 60s sets very difficult high numbers. Especially, 66 and 67, those years are rough
|
1965
|
60's high numbers
Quote:
(Not counting the '68's and '69's; been so long since I completed those I can't really compare.) We now return you to your regular thread :-) Tom |
1960s
Well ok, Tom, we we will look the other way this one time :)
Appreciate the observations |
Orioles
Quote:
Best of luck with the '52's. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:30 AM. |