1961 topps BB

[BillP]

Am I off track on this but there seems to be so much 1961 topps baseball out there. Does anyone feel that the lower series where produced in very high volume or is it popularity of this set. I know the white borders make for easier look in terms of condition v 62 and 63. Comments welcome.

[toppcat]

Topps really started cranking out the cards in '59 and continued to do so for several years as their market peaked in step with the baby boom. You get occasional tough high number series and the like but for the most part there are massive amounts of cards circulating from 59 for about a dozen years thereafter. 61 lows would be right in there.

[mintacular]

I guess its a matter is semantics but massive amount might be an,overstatement. When I go to flea markets and garage sales I don't see boxes of 50s or 60s stuff laying around.....

[tulsaboy]

Keeping in mind that a pretty huge quantity of 1950's and 1960's cards were thrown away as novelties, I think the term "massive" for production is fair, especially given the quantity that still exist.
kevin

[brob28]

The challenge with the '61 set is finding the high series in good condition and centered. I think with most sets if condition and centering are not your thing there are enough out there.

[MCoxon]

I'm not sure if the population is that much lower - certainly PSA pops are not much higher in 1961 vs., say 1956 or 1957

1956: 260,000
1957: 250,000
1961: 275,000

however, that is only graded population. It could be that there are a lot more ungraded 1961s because of lower value/interest.

I wonder if they're also plentiful (at least for acquisition by sale/trade) because, frankly, they're pretty ugly. As a player collector, I find that many players have their worst base card image in 1961 (e.g., Mays, Banks, Clemente). Many hatless shots, and just not a good looking design

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by MCoxon

I'm not sure if the population is that much lower - certainly PSA pops are not much higher in 1961 vs., say 1956 or 1957

1956: 260,000
1957: 250,000
1961: 275,000

however, that is only graded population. It could be that there are a lot more ungraded 1961s because of lower value/interest.

I wonder if they're also plentiful (at least for acquisition by sale/trade) because, frankly, they're pretty ugly. As a player collector, I find that many players have their worst base card image in 1961 (e.g., Mays, Banks, Clemente). Many hatless shots, and just not a good looking design

MCoxon--- I had to stop and think about how large those graded numbers of mainstream Topps are. Nothing "stream" about 250-275 K, that's a huge ocean. Honestly, I love the '61s, but sentimentality rules, I'm sure, since I began collecting cards in '61.

However, you do bring up a good point about the lackluster poses. More than some are downright disgusting, bizarre, or just plain uninspiring. Now, I love the Ernie Banks; he has this super nice, warm smile. But Willie Mays---his worst card. You mentioned Clemente and it's lousy. The Hank Aaron looks bizarre. So many of the 6th and 7th series have this extra dark background.

Yet, they made a plethora of special cards that I find appealing---the league leaders, World Series, multi-player, headline events of the past (I adore the 565-foot Mickey Mantle home run!), Most Valuable Player winners, Sporting News All-Stars, and the team cards with a variety of background colors. Collectively, those special cards make the set a good one.

Still, you are so right about all those hatless shots, and the kazillion head shots. Here Topps makes a design that allows them extra room for the player photo, and they muff their chance!

Nice "talking with you". Take care. --- Brian Powell

[nolemmings]

I find the 1961 card design to be one of Topps' best. The hatless shots are a drag, although that is to be somewhat expected in an expansion year. No excuse for the Mays card-- I have trouble imagining a more unflattering shot. I'm not a fan of the Banks image either, or Killebrew for that matter, although at least his can be explained by the expansion.

I disagree about Clemente-- I like that card of him alot. Brian, I don't see anything bizarre about Aaron's card, which I also really like, mostly because it's not a typical batting pose, although his capless hi-numbered AS card is disappointing. Most of the rest of your post is on point though, for my money. Still, beauty remains in the eye of the beholder, and while 1961 was not my first year of collecting, I count this among my top 2-3 favorite Topps sets.

[jchcollins]

Remember that anything produced in the 1950's or 60's, even if accurately described as "massive" is going to pale in comparison besides the production of, say...1988 Donruss or 1989 Fleer. Massive production yes, but nothing even in the same universe as what began to happen to the hobby when collecting went mainstream, the public beyond collectors became "self-aware" of cards as collectibles...and the junk and BS which ensued. I digress...

For what it's worth I think that '61s are an underappreciated Topps set - and there are many deals to be had in consideration of that. I for one love the Aaron card because you can see that old school Milwaukee uniform with the black tomahawk. Mine's a PSA 4.5.

[Promethius88]

I love the 61's. The design is simple, not a bunch of clutter and yes, a lot of big head shots. I will agree, some of the photos aren't the most flattering but it's just the simplicity of the design that I like, They feel crisp and clean to me, if that makes sense. 67's are also a favorite of mine for basically the same reasons. Although the team name could have been smaller and i can do without the facsimile autographs.