Ken Kendrick's 1952 Topps Baseball Set

[irv]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Won Rookie of the Year status from the 2017 PSA Set Registry competition:

"The DBacks Collection - 1952 Topps Baseball Basic & Master Sets
There are certain categories on the Registry where the competition has been built up over many years between resident collectors, so it’s rare to see a new entry make the kind of statement and impact that this incredible set did in 2017. After being added to our site, this set vaulted to #2 on the All-Time Finest list, carrying a GPA of 8.53. This set, which requires significantly more cards than the Basic set due to the numerous variations found in Series 1 (490 versus 407), packs a serious wallop. This year’s inductee is the only one in Registry history to have both a PSA 10 Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays in the same set. In terms of sheer monetary value, this is the most valuable 1952 Topps set registered on the site. For now, the collection continues to improve as it seeks to dethrone our longstanding leader in overall GPA. In addition to being named Best Rookie Set of the Year, this set joins elite company in our Hall of Fame."

https://www.psacard.com/PSASetRegistry/awardshalloffame

Very cool!

Thanks for sharing, Swarmee!

[JoeDfan]

That is insane.

[ALR-bishop]

A truly amazing project still in the making

I wonder if PSA will ever amend it's master set composition to include 2 Mantles, Robinsons and Thompsons.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

A truly amazing project still in the making

I wonder if PSA will ever amend it's master set composition to include 2 Mantles, Robinsons and Thompsons.

And a trimmed Wagner!! LMAO
I should also say in fairness, I think PSA does a very good job overall. No, I wasn't paid to say that. But if anyone wants to send me money, no strings attached, I will gladly accept it.

[Bestdj777]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

A truly amazing project still in the making

I wonder if PSA will ever amend it's master set composition to include 2 Mantles, Robinsons and Thompsons.

I doubt it. I don't think the big registry folks are interested in purchasing two of each in high grade and, until they do, I don't think the variation is getting recognized.

[brian1961]

I suppose there are those that would insist, "no 1952 Topps Baseball set is complete without BOTH versions of Mantle, Campanella, and Thomson". This is absolute nonsense. I can appreciate a stark variation, but come on. Some collectors really get into "the missing dot", "the stitches running the other way on the baseball on the backside", or the black line circumventing the team logo box. If they could only disappear, and then be allowed to listen to what other collectors think of them, or worse, what the general public would assess such a fanatic----a psychotic collector masochist!

You have to use some common sense. However, the older I get, I find common sense becoming more uncommon.

Keep in mind. The cards were made in 1952. It took until around 1980 until collectors discovered the minuscule variations----roughly 28 years............

Just my nickel pack's worth.

My very best to you, Chris. I miss your posts, bro. Hope all is well for you.

I'm rather certain Mr. Kendrick will not be badgered into buying the second threesome. I wish someone would tell him about my book.

-----Brian Powell

[Peter_Spaeth]

The differences between the two Mantles are pretty significant in my opinion, although I don't have one as to the registry. There is no way those differences were not apparent from the beginning, particularly the line either present or missing in the box, but also the stars and the alignment of the back. The missing pixels, maybe not so much.

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

There is no way those differences were not apparent from the beginning,

Then why did it take 28 years before the differences, and the fact the three were double-printed, become general knowledge to the hobby? I well remember reading about the occasion in 1980.

Tongue in cheek, perhaps those who finally put the knowledge into the spotlight of the hobby print media wanted to "want" until they had finally gotten both versions of the three.

If this is indeed true, I can well understand and relate to their hesitance. These men were collectors first and foremost, and hobby reporters second!

---Brian Powell

[Bestdj777]

Originally Posted by brian1961

My very best to you, Chris. I miss your posts, bro. Hope all is well for you.


-----Brian Powell

Thanks Brian! We will have to agree to disagree on this one. Hope all is well for you also.