Favorite/best and least fav/worst '53 to '79 vintage complete sets?

[cesarcap]

Favorites:
50's - 56 over 300 pieces of art, excludes team cards (I like backs) and Harridge
60's - 67 great design, multiplayer cards, popular RC's and highs
70's - 75 good r/c's, minis, HoF's and affordable

Worst:
50's - 58 if they only used the 59 font here...
60's - 68 others have already noted the negatives
70's - 70 I actually think some of the pix and subsets are cool, but the grey borders are so bland.

[jgannon]

I can never definitively ever name anything as "best" or "favorite", but I do have "favorites". And if I'm naming a favorite set, I'm not taking into account anything about it's resale or breakup value, or how many rookie cards or stars the set has. And over the years, my favorites have actually changed.

What follows are just MY opinions. It's great that we all see things differently and feel differently about the cards. Having these discussion help make the world go 'round! We don't have to agree!


For the 50's:

Favorites:

1952 and 1956 Topps - (Baseball cards as art. The 1955s' are regal and majestic but I just like the 56's better, with the more involved background pictures. There's been a lot of great discussion about them here on the forum.)

1952 and 1953 (color) Bowman


Least Favorite:

1951 Topps - (I actually like them, but I've never felt drawn to them in any big way. Still nice...)


For the 60's

Favorites:

1960, 1967, 1969 Topps (It's funny, I never used to be drawn to the 1960 set. But as I've gotten older, I just started to dig them more. Great photos and design on the front. I love the season highlights and the cartoons on the backs. And with the 1969 set, it started to dawn on me what an amazing design that is. Great pictures, everything.)


Least Favorite:

1962 Topps - (NEVER liked that set. That wood paneling for me, was just a downer. I never got an uplifting feeling looking at those cards. The only vintage set I really just don't like.)



For the 70's:

1970 Topps - (For me, the LAST classic set. I've grown to like the 1971's over the years, but for me, baseball cards just went downhill after that. The 1973 was the beginning of the that constant white border thing. I know the 1975's were different. I like the 1973 card, but after that they all seemed a bit of a variation of that for awhile. They just didn't do it for me.)


There's something great really about ALL of the sets (with the exception of those 1962's, lol. I know that some people really might like that set, so my apologies.)

I would like to say something about the 1968 Topps though. That was the first year I really began to collect. It was so exciting getting the cards, learning about the players, and understanding for the first time what baseball cards were all about. When listing my favorites above, I was approaching things from an aesthetic angle. But I will always have a soft spot in my heart for the 1968's. I like how they look. They have a whole different feel than any other set, and I never looked at the border as "burlap". There is actually a two-tone color to the borders that burlap doesn't have. They were great cards, in my opinion. And I would say that even if they weren't the first set I collected.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by jgannon

There's something great really about ALL of the sets (with the exception of those 1962's, lol. I know that some people really might like that set, so my apologies.)

I would like to say something about the 1968 Topps though. That was the first year I really began to collect. It was so exciting getting the cards, learning about the players, and understanding for the first time what baseball cards were all about. When listing my favorites above, I was approaching things from an aesthetic angle. But I will always have a soft spot in my heart for the 1968's. I like how they look. They have a whole different feel than any other set, and I never looked at the border as "burlap". There is actually a two-tone color to the borders that burlap doesn't have. They were great cards, in my opinion. And I would say that even if they weren't the first set I collected.

I actually kinda like the look of the brown border sets (and find some appeal in them being an occasional change from the norm.)

You knew the opinions here would be varied, but the differences are even more vast than I would've expected!

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

I actually kinda like the look of the brown border sets (and find some appeal in them being an occasional change from the norm.)

You knew the opinions here would be varied, but the differences are even more vast than I would've expected!

Yeah, I really enjoy reading why everyone likes what they like! As was said above, beauty is in the eye of the beholder!

And it's good to know, that I am not alone in liking the 1968 Topps set! I think it was a subtler set in a lot of ways. There's something about the pictures. There's just a different quality about them. But each year's pics have their own feeling, of course. I like the backs of the 68's as well. Their own style, easy to read stats, the cartoon, etc.

Edit: Oh, wait a minute! Maybe you were talking about the 1962 set? But either way, it's great all of our differing opinions!

[mikemb]

Best -

50s 1956 Great design and pictures

60s 1965 Love the pennants and team colors

70s 1979 Basic but well done

Worst -

50s 1958 Boring

60s 1968 Boring

70s 1975 Boring and ugly

Mike

Mike

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Edit: Oh, wait a minute! Maybe you were talking about the 1962 set? But either way, it's great all of our differing opinions!

Both the '62 and '68. Plus the '55 Bowman

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Both the '62 and '68. Plus the '55 Bowman

Yeah, I like the 1955 Bowman. The whole TV set thing was cool. Not my favorite set, but I still like it.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Both the '62 and '68. Plus the '55 Bowman

I only have a few sets that I really dislike and the 55 Bowman is one of them. I think the TVs look cheesy plus Bowman couldn't figure out how big to make the cards. The 53 Topps looks like high school art projects with poor art and is mostly portraits. The 54 Topps with their black and white action shots look lame when Bowman was making beautiful color sets. After that Topps really stepped up their game with 3 of the nicest card sets ever made. Those 3 are really the only ones that I would say I don't like. The 64 Topps is my least favorite of the 60s, but the Clemente is one of my favorite cards. The 78 Topps is the only 70s set that I don't really like a lot, but there are lots of great cards like the Reggie Jackson.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by rats60

I only have a few sets that I really dislike and the 55 Bowman is one of them. I think the TVs look cheesy plus Bowman couldn't figure out how big to make the cards. The 53 Topps looks like high school art projects with poor art and is mostly portraits. The 54 Topps with their black and white action shots look lame when Bowman was making beautiful color sets. After that Topps really stepped up their game with 3 of the nicest card sets ever made. Those 3 are really the only ones that I would say I don't like. The 64 Topps is my least favorite of the 60s, but the Clemente is one of my favorite cards. The 78 Topps is the only 70s set that I don't really like a lot, but there are lots of great cards like the Reggie Jackson.

We either completely agree or disagree about most sets, cause I love the '53 Topps design as well (especially the background artwork and bright colors.)

And I like how it contrasts with the '52 Topps, which can have a more dark and even slightly foreboding feel at times.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Both the '62 and '68. Plus the '55 Bowman

You know, I think I'll take back what I said about the 62's. While not my favorite set, I think I was thinking of a few cards I have that are just not in the best shape. I looked at a couple online, and yeah, I like 'em.

[55koufax]

So this "dis-liked" 1964 set is way beyond popular and competitive right now on the PSA Registry. Results in from 5-11 and recently.

1. No. 435 Davalillo. PSA 9 = $202.50 (highest price by far in 7 years)
2. No. 487 McCormick. PSA 9 = $202.22 (I paid $47 for an 8.5 10 years ago)
3. No. 501 Veale. PSA 9 = $150 (avg for 3 sales in 2020 - prior not close)
4. No. 120 Drysdale. PSA 9 = $415 (avg for 2 sales in 2020 - prior avg from $200 to $300 every year)

Common 9's that are not exactly ultra low pops pulling in $150 to $200. That is insane.