Post War Set Collectors - Rank Em

[Harliduck]

I was talking to a guy at our local shop over the weekend and he was just getting into vintage Topps set collecting. First thing he asked was what sets are the hardest by decade? Doing sets from all decades, it was a fun talk. I would love to hear others perspective on this for fun...what's your opinion? Here is mine -

Ranked by degree of difficulty
Factors - Cost, Scarcity, High Numbers, HOF Rookies, Series, Number of cards in set, ect...


1970s

1. 1971 Topps (Condition sensitive, High numbers, 752 Cards, HOF Stars)
2. 1972 Topps (High numbers, 787 Cards, Stars/Traded in High's, HOF Stars)
3. 1970 Topps (High numbers, 720 Cards, Nolan Ryan, Bench, HOF Stars)
4. 1973 Topps (Last set by Series, Schmidt RC, HOF Stars)
5. 1975 Topps (Regular or Mini's, Brett & Yount RC, other HOF RCs)
6. 1978 Topps (No series, Murray, Molitar, Morris RCs)
7. 1974 Topps (No series, Winfield RC, Aaron Specials)
8. 1976 Topps (No series, second year cards)
9. 1979 Topps (No series, Smith RC)
10. 1977 Topps (No series, low cost stars, poor RC's (Murphy)

1960s

1. 1961 Topps (SP High numbers, All Stars, HOF RCs & Stars, 6 Mantles)
2. 1963 Topps (SP High numbers, HOF RC's & Stars, Rose RC)
3. 1966 Topps (SP High numbers, HOF RC's & Stars)
4. 1967 Topps (SP High numbers, HOF RC's & Stars)
5. 1962 Topps (High numbers, HOF RC's & Stars)
6. 1960 Topps (High numbers, HOF RC's & Stars)
7. 1964 Topps (Semi Tough High numbers, HOF RC's & Stars)
8. 1965 Topps (HOF RC's & Stars)
9. 1968 Topps (HOF RC's & Stars, Ryan RC)
10. 1969 Topps (HOF RC's & Stars)

1950s

1. 1952 Topps (SP High numbers; Mantle, Mathews, ect..)
2. 1957 Topps (SP Mid Series, 6 HOF RCs, HOF Stars, 407 Cards)
3. 1954 Topps (Aaron, Banks, Kaline RCs, 2 Williams, HOF Stars)
4. 1959 Topps (SP High numbers, HOF RC's & Stars, 572 Cards)
5. 1955 Topps (High numbers, HOF Stars; HOF RCs, only 206 Cards)
6. 1953 Topps (SP High numbers, Low HOF Stars)
7. 1956 Topps (342 Cards, HOF Stars, Mantle)
8. 1958 Topps (494 Cards, HOF Stars)


Top 10 Toughest Topps Sets Postwar -

1. 1952 Topps
2. 1957 Topps
3. 1954 Topps
4. 1961 Topps
5. 1963 Topps
6. 1966 Topps
7. 1959 Topps
8. 1955 Topps
9. 1967 Topps
10. 1953 Topps




OK...just one set collectors experienced OPINION...pick me apart! Again, this is Ranked by toughest to complete...not aesthetics.

[JollyElm]

I think you did a yeoman's job with your list. My sets really run through the 60's and 70's and it seems you have them pretty much ranked wisely. Of course, anything after 1973 can be listed and relisted a whole bunch of different ways, but they all just kinda get grouped together in the 'easy' category.

Overall, a nice 1966 set is probably much harder to achieve than the 1963 set...but then there's that damn high number Rose rookie. Oof! The entire 60's decade in general (save 1965, 68 & 69) is a slave to the high numbers.

[Harliduck]

JE...that's funny...I have either got the 60s set, or have a decent start EXCEPT 1963. I know how tough the 66 set is...really no concept of 63 only to know that there is tough SP High numbers...and yes, I ranked it higher because of the damn Rose card...a card I don't yet have.


I agree on the 70s...bummer they quit putting out cards by series...and being born in 1970, and buying my first packs in 78, never got to experience the strategic buying by series as a kid. I did however build 78 and 79 and on up through packs...my childhood passion.


63 vs. 66....probably depends on the deal you can get on your Rose!!

[Harliduck]

And thanks on the comments for the post...I LOVE ranking things...

[Zach Wheat]

Good topic. I am mainly a set collector, but did not find it too difficult to complete a '57 or '54 set. Absolutely agree with the difficulty in completing a '52 set, even without all the myriad variations.

I had trouble completing a '55 Bowman due to the high numbers and all the umpires, which apparently for some odd reason, kids didn't save!

So I would probably re-rank accordingly.


Z Wheat

[Harliduck]

I didn't rank the Bowmans sets...for me and this go around, and the last time I put sets together, I didn't have much experience with them. When I was young I was given a 55 Bowman set in trade and each card was in Poor condition at best...and really had zero to do. I can only imagine how those umpire cards would fare...I too couldn't stand them when I had them.

I didn't take variations in consideration as well...I only do base sets. Would variations (outside the obvious 52 set which even without is the undisputed toughest) change any ranking?? Al??? Haha.