1961 Topps Yastrzemski...and enigma

BuckHunter68

I like the card. I'll say that right off the bat. I have had collectors love it and I've had collectors hate it. Recently, I began doing re-do's of some of Topps uglier cards. I was surprised (always am--as I like the card) when I got a request to "re-do" it to a more attractive card.
I understand the colorization was a third party and they used an old photo they obtained so the card has a more "52ish vibe".
But I'd like to see more artistic cards regardless.
I wonder what you guys think of the '61 Yaz and the way it presents within the set.

PNWcollector

Yaz aside, the 61 Topps set design is one of my least favorite of that decade.

BuckHunter68

The point was the Yaz. Yes, it's an unimaginative design.

1959

I think the whole set is rather bland, not just the Yaz.

gemint

I tend to like the set. The Frank Robinson is my favorite for some reason. I like the colors and look of the Reds uniforms with that design for some reason and it's an MVP year card.

Tibor

Can someone post a '61 Yaz so that we can argue the point clearly.

pab1969

I like the Yaz and the set look.

ScoobyDoo2

I think there is some frustration with collectors over redundant photos from his RC to the next '61 year.....Topps had those years of laziness on occasion.

coinkat

The historical importance of the 1961 set exceeds its artistic and design merits. Th 1959 and 1960 cards are more attractive. I have some decent 1961 cards- my plans are simply not to obtain a complete set but I would not discourage anyone from undertaking the 1961 challenge

BaltimoreYankee

@coinkat said:
The 1959 and 1960 cards are more attractive.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I like the 1961 set because so much of the card is devoted to the photo. I don't like 1959 Topps because the amount of real estate dedicated to the picture is small.
I do like the '61 Yaz even though it's the same photo as his rookie card.

brad31

Love the ‘61 Yaz and the ‘61 set.

First on Yaz - Topps reuses images all the time. For Yaz his ‘60,’61 and ‘63, ‘’64, his ‘66 ‘67 and his ‘68 ‘69 are all the same photos. Many other players have the same thing. In this case going from horizontal to vertical and seeing the whole image is cool and a better re-use than most. I find this card to be interesting, different and beautiful.

On the ‘61 set - I love the simple design. As stated above the photo is the star. It has great subsets in the MVPs (might be my favorite Topps subset) the World Series subset with multiple HOF cards, the Baseball Thrills and the awesome All-Stars with the newspaper design. The leaders are loaded with HOFers and have a great look. Been working on a ‘61 HOF set and it is huge. I am not the biggest Mantle guy but most are - he has a base, World Series, Baseball Thrills, MVP, All-Star and is on a leader card. This has to be the most Mantles in a set. I love the colors in the ‘61 set - the photos look vintage. More plentiful than many years - seemed to be a plethora of cello packs still around that makes 8s and even higher grades plentiful enough to keep prices reasonable.

Plus 3 HOF rookies in Marichal, Williams and Santo. I am a Cubs fan so this is a great class for me - but Marichal is criminally underrated.

coinkat

Marichal and Santo I have... And I agree that these rookie cards are underrated- especially the Marichal

MantleMarisFordBerra

@brad31 said: and the awesome All-Stars with the newspaper design.

I always liked how if you use just a little imagination it looks as if Whitey Ford threw the ball through the newspaper. I do like this set as a whole, and I think ScoobyDoo2 brings u a good point about how Topps over used the same image for so many players. I do wish they had used a new image for every year.

__

BBBrkrr

Always loved the '61 design, but hated the Yaz. It just looks like a total airbrush job like a cheap postcard from that era.

mark_dak

Personally love the 1961 set. I was well on my way to completing it some years ago. Never actually completed it. I like the fact the picture takes up most of the card without too much garbage in the way. Yaz card wasn't the highlight of the set by any stretch.

Mark

DBesse27

I’m a Yaz super collector. FWIW, I prefer his ‘61 over his rookie card

BuckHunter68

@BBBrkrr said:
Always loved the '61 design, but hated the Yaz. It just looks like a total airbrush job like a cheap postcard from that era.

Thank you. This is exactly what I was hoping someone would say--one way or the other.
The Yaz was not a color film as most 61s are. It was a grainy black and white image that was reproduced and colored with Flexichrome. Meanwhile, the Mantle and Aaron, for example, are obviously Kodachrome.

BuckHunter68

brad31

Yaz was not on the Topps All-Star Rookie team. The Rookie Star designation was kind of like the later future stars designation and completely different (same as 1960 for Yaz but instead of having a unique card design they just put the star logo). Do like the photo of him. Looks like something from ‘53 Bowman color.

Here is the All-Star Rookie Team and the list of players who earned the right to have the trophy on their cards:

DBesse27

Yaz didn’t even play in the majors in 1960, so having the all star rookie trophy on the 61 design makes zero sense.

BuckHunter68

Kind of like having the Star Rookie on his actual '61. Zero sense, perhaps.

DBesse27

@BuckHunter68 said:
Kind of like having the Star Rookie on his actual '61. Zero sense, perhaps.

Not the same. Saying somebody is a top rookie in their rookie season is not the same as claiming they were voted an all star rookie the year before, when they weren’t, and weren’t even in the league.