If you could make the Big 3 into the Big 4, what set are you adding?

[cgjackson222]

For Big Four, I would include Cracker Jack (both '14 and '15 since they are pretty similar). Maybe Cracker Jack would already be considered one of the Big sets if they were more accessible/common. The other Big 3 sets have large Populations.

Runner ups would be '53 Bowman (trailblazing full color with actual, gorgeous pictures) and '55 Topps (first major horizontal, and it has some important rookies including Clemente and Koufax).

[Zach Wheat]

My first thought weas N172's with the Cracker Jack sets a close 2nd

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

My parameters:

1. A set on the larger side with nationwide presence. Nothing small.

2. Emblematic & representatitve of its era.

3. Caught the country by storm.

4. Can not be issued too closely to one of the preexisting "Big 3" due to too much player/era crossover.

I have no interest in the inclusion of another 1950's or 1910s issue. I absolutely love the looks of CJs, and so many of the 1950's Topps and Bowman issues, but they can't really surpass the sheer monstrosity of what T206 and 1952 did for the hobby and continue to do to this day. Consider them the gateway drugs to their respective eras.

Speaking of 1950's Topps issues, I don't think anyone has mentioned the 1957 set. Quite surprising. Photo quality, player selection and strandardizing modern card size for decades to come. Regardless, I wouldn't vote for them over the '52s even though I like them more.

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

Speaking of 1950's Topps issues, I don't think anyone has mentioned the 1957 set. Quite surprising. Photo quality, player selection and strandardizing modern card size for decades to come. Regardless, I wouldn't vote for them over the '52s even though I like them more.

I mentioned the 1957 Topps set in Post #42 of this thread.

[peterb69]

Although I love the N172’s, I’d have to sat the combined 14/15 Cracker Jacks.