Vote!! Worst Topps produced set of the 1960's

[Mountaineer1999]

1960 or 1968! I went with 60, just dont like the little B&W photo or the multi colored name lettering. '68 was saved by the backs as I like the full stats.

[pclpads]

1968. Just butt-ugly.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by pclpads

1968. Just butt-ugly.

The Burlap is kinda ugly, but there are still worse sets than that one. And the double player cards with Ryan and Bench's rookie cards are kind of cool.

[Econteachert205]

I'm in the minority, I love the 68s. It's the only 60s cards i have in any real numbers and I have the whole set. A family friend gave me a handful when I was 7-8 and I was mesmerized. I don't like the 1960 horizontals.

[hcv123]

For me it was between 1961 and 1968. Interestingly The 1968's remind me of 1987 Topps - Overproduced - not particularly attractive. So I voted for 1968.

[Rich Klein]

65's are my personal choice. 68 is sentimental for me as the 1st set I collected as a kid so can't go there. Perhaps 69, although I completed it as a kid is the real choice.

[Beatles Guy]

Originally Posted by Mountaineer1999

1960 or 1968! I went with 60, just dont like the little B&W photo or the multi colored name lettering. '68 was saved by the backs as I like the full stats.

Funny, the multi-colored name lettering is one feature that really draws me to this set

[ALR-bishop]

Jason---then the 1960 Antonelli with the uneven colored letters must sing to you

[Beatles Guy]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Jason---then the 1960 Antonelli with the uneven colored letters must sing to you

If you drink enough, they look straight

[Beatles Guy]

For what it's worth, I think the 1960 Topps Mantle and Clemente are the two most attractive cards of those stars that Topps ever produced.

[brewing]

I went with the 1968 set, the burlap is too much for me.

1962 would probably be the next on my list, dark back, wood grain, and the lack of any card in the set to "wow" me.

[pokerplyr80]

I see the 68 set is the runaway winner in this vote but I voted for 67. As a kid I was a huge Nolan Ryan fan and always wanted his RC. That alone would keep me from viewing it as the worst, but I don't really mind the look either.

[MCoxon]

Originally Posted by Beatles Guy

Funny, the multi-colored name lettering is one feature that really draws me to this set

I agree - I love the multi-color lettering on the 60s (I also love the 57s that have the colorful blue/red letters for name/team). At the same time, I agree that the 60 horizontal two-picture format can be distracting, and the number of players without caps bothers me (e.g., Maris, Koufax)

To me though every set has some clunkers and some winners, which is why no matter which set through the 50s-70s, there are always cards I love in each

[Griffins]

'61's for me. Muddy photography, boring design. Same with '57 and '69 Topps, muddy photography

Rich, '65's are your least favorite? After '53 Bowman and '67 Topps, that is my favorite design post war.

While '68 is leading, no one set seems to stand out as the absolute worst. Wonder if you took out sentimental favorites ('68 and '70 iare not designs liked by most, but they are my sentimental favorites) what the vote would be?