Worst Topps Design 1952-1976

[iwantitiwinit]

Thought I'd take a quick poll on the worst Topps design/appeal from 1952-1976 a few selections. I voted for 1965, ugh.

[orioles70]

Topps created the standard size in 1957 and it is a beauty and one of my favorites. I recently completed it after purchasing the literal last card in rhe set...Yankee Power Hitters. But Topps must have used up all that creativity in 1957 and phoned in the 1958 and 1959 designs...take your pick...either 1958 or 1959...both are awful.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[MarcosCards]

A lot of this boils down to aesthetics – and personal preference - of course. But I think the nostalgia factor also comes in to play. For me, the 1959‘s were during my collecting wheelhouse time period. They take me back in such an awesome way! Also, I like the rich background colors – except the pink. I voted for the 1974 set design - truly uninspiring.

[Griffins]

so many choices from '58-62. I think '65 is one of the best though.
'57 and '69 have decent designs but horrible photography/reproduction

[jchcollins]

Out of those listed I'd pick '74. I think the '58 set is underrated.

[Harliduck]

I agree, I LOVE 65...one of my top sets although the high cards are not exciting like other years...

For me it's easy...58 Topps. Can't stand them. I have owned, currently owned, or worked on every set from 54 up EXCEPT the 58's. Lack of rookies, the design, the massive amount of head shots...you name it. I know one day I will have to tackle the set and I am 99% sure I will just buy it complete.

To me there isn't a bad issue in the 60's...69 being my favorite for many reasons...and I grew up on the 70s but would admit the 73 and 75s are blah. I rarely pull out those sets to look through...

[darkhorse9]

How could you ignore the horrific 1964 set? It's easily one of the most boring sets ever produced by anyone

[7nohitter]

Originally Posted by darkhorse9

How could you ignore the horrific 1964 set? It's easily one of the most boring sets ever produced by anyone

I see your 1964 set and raise you the most boring set ever: 1967

[Harliduck]

Worst part of the 67 set is the Mantle. Imagine an iconic swinging bat pose instead of the dumb head shot with that ugly green back ground. Card would be worth twice as much with a better picture.

[Jim65]

Not on the list but I always thought 73 Topps was uglier than Rosie O'Donnell

[7nohitter]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

Worst part of the 67 set is the Mantle. Imagine an iconic swinging bat pose instead of the dumb head shot with that ugly green back ground. Card would be worth twice as much with a better picture.

Exactly!!! I mean it's hard to hate a Mantle card....but its my least favorite!

[Peter_Spaeth]

73

[BearBailey]

1962, but having 1965 on the list is baffling, personal preferences I guess.

[Bigdaddy]

Originally Posted by BearBailey

1962, but having 1965 on the list is baffling, personal preferences I guess.

Agree. I'm finishing up a '65 set and the colors just pop and the photos are so clear and in focus. Topps must have paid a premium to the printer that year.

My vote is for 1958 or 1974 for the worst design and execution.

[clydepepper]

I love the '65 design!

I'd vote for the 1960 for worst.

Not a fan of either 1966 or 1972, though the later had the distinction of being original.

[smrtn240]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Not on the list but I always thought 73 Topps was uglier than Rosie O'Donnell

https://images.app.goo.gl/WyfxHDMAhJbh2ZfE9



Ouch!

[hcv123]

How varied personal taste is. So before looking at your list. I envisioned cards from each year and came up with a list of contenders in my head. My list was 1961, 1966, 1968 and 1974. Of those, only 1968 and 1974 were on your list (which I likely would have narrowed down to anyway). It's close to me - I have memories of buying, flipping, etc. 1974's that puts them a bit higher for me - although admittedly the design leaves much to be desired (saving grace - some of the action poses). Thinking of the monotonous borders and overproduction of the 68's finally led my vote there - I see a bit more than 1/3 of voters are agreed - that's a pretty good consensus for net 54!

[rhettyeakley]

I voted 1968, a close second was 1974 (bad production quality that year as well).

I am shocked that 1965 is even in consideration and am also pretty surprised 1958 is up there as well. I mainly collect the Topps issues autographed and I don’t think they could have made a better set for that than the 1958 set. The color background makes the autograph really pop! As far as autographs go the 1975 set is my least favorite towards that end, but it is a pretty neat set in and of itself.

[KendallCat]

1963 and 1967. 63 is boring and the rookie cards with the floating heads is strange imo.

[Hxcmilkshake]

This is like asking me to pick the kid I love the least.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[BillP]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

I voted 1968, a close second was 1974 (bad production quality that year as well).

I am shocked that 1965 is even in consideration and am also pretty surprised 1958 is up there as well. I mainly collect the Topps issues autographed and I don’t think they could have made a better set for that than the 1958 set. The color background makes the autograph really pop! As far as autographs go the 1975 set is my least favorite towards that end, but it is a pretty neat set in and of itself.

I'd vote for any set that has so many diamond cuts. To me that's 69.

[BillP]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

I agree, I LOVE 65...one of my top sets although the high cards are not exciting like other years...

For me it's easy...58 Topps. Can't stand them. I have owned, currently owned, or worked on every set from 54 up EXCEPT the 58's. Lack of rookies, the design, the massive amount of head shots...you name it. I know one day I will have to tackle the set and I am 99% sure I will just buy it complete.

To me there isn't a bad issue in the 60's...69 being my favorite for many reasons...and I grew up on the 70s but would admit the 73 and 75s are blah. I rarely pull out those sets to look through...

I for one have warmed up to 58. To hard to collect, like the colors, have gotten over the headshots. For me outside the diamond cut 69 set, it's 61. I have all the sets around it but I think it's drab and can't motivate myself to collect it. same with 61 fb.

[1963Topps Set]

1969 - all of the team name are the same color - yellow. No team cards. Many capless photos due to expansion. Bland overall design.

1953 - Topps only venture into art work, YUK! The Bowman art work of 1950 - 1952 puts this to shame. I have not even attempted a 1953 Topps set because I find it so unappealing.

[VintageVinnie]

'68 for me is just pure yuk...something about that burlap color/design..ugh!

[Mark70Z]

I just couldn’t take part in the poll since I enjoy all the designs. If I had to choose it would be ‘58 and even though I like the design I’m not much of a fan of the picture selected for the Brooksie card that year.

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

I just couldn’t take part in the poll since I enjoy all the designs. If I had to choose it would be ‘58 and even though I like the design I’m not much of a fan of the picture selected for the Brooksie card that year.

I totally get that mentality on Brooksie...61 Topps takes a dent with me because the Killebrew card is so poor. I do like the set though, and am currently rebuilding...but that dang Killer card just sucks! The 58 Killer card isn't one of my favorites, but it's a decent card.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by 1963Topps Set

1969 - all of the team name are the same color - yellow. No team cards. Many capless photos due to expansion. Bland overall design.

1953 - Topps only venture into art work, YUK! The Bowman art work of 1950 - 1952 puts this to shame. I have not even attempted a 1953 Topps set because I find it so unappealing.

Agree on 1953 Topps. All the head shots are just boring. I would add 1954 Topps. It is a worse version of the 1958 set. I absolutely hate the 1952-54 Topps sets, they are the ugliest sets Topps made. Luckily they upped their game with the 1955 and 1956 Topps designs, two of the best ever, and the rest is history.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by rats60

Agree on 1953 Topps. All the head shots are just boring. I would add 1954 Topps. It is a worse version of the 1958 set. I absolutely hate the 1952-54 Topps sets, they are the ugliest sets Topps made. Luckily they upped their game with the 1955 and 1956 Topps designs, two of the best ever, and the rest is history.

Yeah, I especially hate the 53 Mays, 53 Mantle and 53 Robinson. About 7K worth of cards that are ugly head shots, but I sure enjoy their ugliness.

I especially hate the 54 Aaron, the 2 -54 Ted Williams and the 54 Robinson too. Very boring.. I also hate the 52 Mantle, The 52 Mays and 52 Jackie Robinson. Very ugly.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

Yeah, I especially hate the 53 Mays, 53 Mantle and 53 Robinson. About 7K worth of cards that are ugly head shots, but I sure enjoy their ugliness.

I especially hate the 54 Aaron, the 2 -54 Ted Williams and the 54 Robinson too. Very boring.. I also hate the 52 Mantle, The 52 Mays and 52 Jackie Robinson. Very ugly.

The 1952 Topps Mantle is the ugliest baseball card ever made. Who uses a yellow painted bat? When Bowman was putting out great looking sets, Topps was putting out garbage. I owned those sets and sold them because they were ugly. Collect what you like and I will do the same.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

1970 is the most boring set design in history

[VintageVinnie]

I don't get how you think 52-54 are ugly cards???? BUT, rats 60 says it best...the freedom to collect what you like. That's the beauty of our hobby. Everybody has different tastes, opinions, and points of view. Here, here!

[rats60]

Originally Posted by VintageVinnie

I don't get how you think 52-54 are ugly cards???? BUT, rats 60 says it best...the freedom to collect what you like. That's the beauty of our hobby. Everybody has different tastes, opinions, and points of view. Here, here!

The 1954 cards use black and white background photos. After the beautiful 1953 Bowman cards, the design looks ugly, cheap and lazy on Topps part. The 1953 set uses bad paintings that look like failed high school art projects and vastly inferior to the 1950-52 Bowman designs as 1963Topps Set pointed out. All just my opinion, but Topps pre 1955 was putting out inferior designs to Bowman. If you prefer these to the full color designs of 1955 and 1956 Topps that is your opinion, but mine is the 1955-56 Topps and 1950-53 Bowman blow them away.

[Chris-Counts]

I agree with those who say 1953 was the worst of all Topps sets. The design actually isn't bad, but a lack of action poses, bad artwork and borders that bleed color and chip easily make this set a clunker.

[HRBAKER]

1973

[55koufax]

Simplicity rules!

[55koufax]

'67 Mantle is without a doubt the single worst Mantle card ever. I used to practically throw them in the garbage as a kid.

[LeftHandedDane]

The only standard size card that was produced horizontally, the pictures are small and boring, the ugly black and white second cut-out photo, the ugly gold color on the back, the lack of full career statistics, coaches cards (really?) - there is just really not much to like about 1960 to me.

[PolarBear]

58 shouldn't even be part of the discussion. It's a great set, with a "Cracker Jack" feel to it. There are better sets for sure but the 58 is no where near the worst set.

Now, the 68 burlap sack border cards, yeah, that's bad. Or the 1970 recycled newspaper borders, also pretty bad.

Someone mentioned the 73 set. It's so bad it's good. Check out Luis Alvarado playing a pick up game on a grade school field.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Best: 65, 57, 54, 53
Worst: 73, 68, 60

[darwinbulldog]

'68 is bad, but '55 Bowman is worse.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Of the sets listed, '68 has to be the worst. Why did Topps change the design in the later series?

[seanofjapan]

I think design needs to be set apart from photography. The sets from the 1960s are universally bad from a photography standpoint regardless of the design. Personally I like the design of the 1962 and 1965 sets, but just get so bored looking at the posed spring training pictures that I can't get too excited about the sets.

While the sets of the early 70s you at least had the benefit of a few cards with decent in-game action photos (though most cards still had that posed spring training photo problem). So I don't mind the 1974 set that much, some cards in it have some quite striking pictures that you don't see on sets from the 60s.

[Mark17]

! like the run from 1961-1967, plus 1956 and 1957 best. Worst is 1959 - way too much border. I always thought it was like looking through a periscope.

[mintonlyplz]

Originally Posted by Mark17

! like the run from 1961-1967, plus 1956 and 1957 best. Worst is 1959 - way too much border. I always thought it was like looking through a periscope.

Or 1959 is like looking through a peep hole!

[jerrys]

1959 worse - 1971 best

[jchcollins]

I'll be unpopular and own up to liking '61 Topps. Yeah the design is anything but cutting-edge, and the capless photos are boring, but for trying to collect a set from that era I think it's one of the more reasonable ones, and it's loaded with Hall of Famers. If the base cards are standard at best, Topps outdid themselves with the All Star cards in the high series, which IMO is one of the coolest designs ever.

[BillP]

Interesting reading on peoples preferences.

For me:

Best in no particular order: 67 63 66 54 58

warming up to: 64 62 57 65 59

Not in the mix: 61, 60, 73,74, 72

I have 57-68 sets except 61. Just can't get excited about it and I've tried.

bill

[mouschi]

I know this poll is over, but 1974 and it isn't even close

[jchcollins]

It's also interesting to me how my tastes have changed. When I first discovered old cards as a kid, I hated 1972 Topps. Of course at the time they were only about 14-15 years old, and any sense of nostalgia that we have now about the 1970's had not yet developed. Today I think the '72s are awesome and it's one of my favorite sets of all-time.

[kailes2872]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

'68 is bad, but '55 Bowman is worse.

I know that the 55 Bowman has its flaws, but I think that having color TV sets for cards in the 50's is pretty cool. Color TV was a new phenomenon and it was very cutting edge. It would be like a manufacturer doing an Iphone card in 2009.

I have told the kids that when I go, they can do with them what they would like. My 13 year old daughter usually just seems my collection as something that gets in the way of her building her wardrobe or shoe collection. However, I asked her which ones were her favorites and what she would want. She did not hesitate when she said '55 Bowman (or as she calls it, the TV cards), and 62 Topps.

I don't much care for '70, '73, '74, '64, '66, '68, and '69.

I am meh on '67, '61, '60, 58, 59, '52, and '53

I like '62, '71, '72 (birth year, holds a special place), and '57 (because the
pictures all look so dark).

I love '54 (I like the background colors), '55, 63, and '65

My favorite of all time will always be '56. It had the best player selection, the action shots (Mantle, Clemente) were awesome. 34 HOFers out of 340 cards. It was as if Topps was at their creative apex after battling Bowman for the past 5 years. The rookies are light, but that helps keep the cost down. If it had Musial, it might be perfect.

I need to start on 52 Topps soon as it is the last one left for me and I am having trouble getting excited. I don't like them all that much and they are expensive which is a bad combination.