Last card - 1965 Topps completed

[brian1961]

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! ---Brian Powell

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by brian1961

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! ---Brian Powell

Thanks Brian. I am pretty pumped about finishing the 1965 set. Besides being my birth year, it is also my favorite set from the 60's. Great question about my favorite cards. I agree that the Stottlemyre card is cool (and a bear to find centered!). I would say my three favorite cards are: Aaron (I think it is his best 60's or 70's card), Bob Gibson (the Cardinals color combination on the 1965's is awesome), and Mantle (like Aaron, I think 1965 is his best 1960's card). Aside from the these cards, I really like World Series and leader cards.

[ALR-bishop]

Congrats, Ed on finishing 65 and good hunting on the 52s

65 & 75...why 52 and not 55 ?

[brian1961]

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

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Congrats, Ed on finishing 65 and go oh hunting on the 52s



65 & 75...why 52 and not 55 ?

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

[sox1903wschamp]

Congrats on the 65 set completion. 65 is a great set.

[Zach Wheat]

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

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by Zach Wheat

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

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

[obctom]

Originally Posted by Zach Wheat

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

Forgive me for hijacking this (briefly), but of the 60's sets, I still need to complete high numbers for '67, '66, and '61. For me, the '65 high numbers were easy. And in my experience the level of difficulty - from "most difficult to least", goes '67, '66, and then '61. I would rate the '62 high numbers about equal to the '61's in difficulty, with '63 and '65 the least difficult (minus the '63 Rose of course). Disclaimer: I'm not a condition-sensitive collector, so I can't speak to the level of difficulty finding pristine EX to EX-MT cards.

(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