1960's Set Completion

RayBShotz

Lets talk cards.

The following is a list of 1960's Baseball sets and those that are 100% complete (or not).

1960 100% (1)
1961 100% (3)
1962 52% Highest
1963 100% (2)
1964 96% Highest
1965 100% (1)
1966 70% Highest
1967 100% (2) 99% (1)
1968 100% (1) Revere 93%
1969 74% Highest

Would you suspect that 62,66,69T Baseball sets not being complete are a case of the popularity is less; these set have many, many tough cards; or coincidence?

I can only speak as a long time collector of 69'T. Although this set is the last of the 60's it is certainly as challenging as any set from the decade. It appears from the registrants to be quite popular. There are dozens of tough card as pointed out by the POP report and many of the hard core 69'ers on this board including myself. The addition of the WL variations as a standard entry for the 69' registry completion, as opposed to an either/or situation for each card makes this set extra tough. It also bumps the card total to 687 cards (largest card count of the 60's sets). Does this initially steer some people clear of this set. Perhaps.

I would like to hear from others who are working hard to complete their own 60's set of choice. Whats tough about your set and what do you make of the not yet complete sets?

All responses are welcome as always.

RayB69Topps

69topps8

I think the WL requirement definitely scares some people away from trying to complete a graded 1969 set. I have no intentions of building a white letter subset and have requested that they be changed from being required to being either/or. I think it's only fair since they are technically error cards. Also, there are more significant variations in the set (like the Dalrymple catching pose) that are not considered separate entities to complete the set. I'm not sure what the print run was for the white letters, but I would say it is so small that the WL's would preclude most people from being able to complete the set if they were required. If I were to build a PSA 8 WL subset (if it's even possible), it would probably cost me $10k or more. That increases the total set price by about 50%.

I think the registry will be updated in the not too distant future to make it the proper 664 card set with the WL variations being sufficient but not necessary components to the complete set.

toppsgun

The #1 Registrant to the 1963 set tells me it is a tough set, no so much due to the colored borders (which are tough enough), but due to what he believes are (a) short printed 4th series cards (#284-370) and (b) print defects in the first series.

After doing a little research, I tend to agree with him. At last count, there were about 10 cards in the first series with a population of 4 or less in PSA 8. There appear to be at least five known collectors of 1963 at the top of the Registry competing for those cards. Not to mention several players not yet on the Registry. That makes for a spirited auction when one of those low pop. commons come up on ebay. Someone mentioned that in a recent thread. I saw a #383-Richert (pop.5) go for over $200 a couple of weeks ago. And $100+ is not unusual at all for anything with few than 10 copies in 8 holders.

A look at the 4th series stars is very interesting, too. The Berra card stands out with only 34 graded 8. Other cards in that price range, but found in other series, have double to triple the population. Another one is Mays. There are about 20% fewer copies in 8 than Aaron, who resides the next (5th) series.

There are only variation cards listed in the 1963 set. In contrast to 1969, I think the '63 variations should be required for set completion, but they are not. (They're are enough of them floating around, it wouldn't be impossible.) I've forwarded that idea to BJ, who tells me they will consider it once more sets are initially loaded into the registry and they have a chance to work on backlogged requests such as that. But you are right about the white letter variations in '69. Those are too many and too rare in 8 to require for set completion.

Personally, I never thought much of the set anyway. No team cards, expansion that year effectively put minor leaguers on cards and 600+ cards is more baseball than I care to tackle. I also remember Georgia Music and Sports years ago having literally dozens of vending boxes of 1969 for sale. Each card was soft-sleeved, priced at $1.00, $1.50 or $2.00 depending on centering. I figured, this was the beginning of "modern" and not vintage, so I decided to pass. I do have the set, but I'm not serious about upgrading or grading it. I've got 3 sets of the '69 deckle, but that's a bust for sure.

toppsgun

Sorry for the lousy editing job on that reply. There are six (6) variations in the 1963 set.

theBobs

100% only tells part of the story. In 1965, Mastro has 100% but also had alot of cards lower than 7 included. I haven't checked the composition recently. Wayne on the other had is down to 5 cards, but has yet to register a card below 8. Wayne could have sent in off-condition cards for grading and been 100% a long time ago.

Neither approach is right or wrong. Just that 100% with off-grades is different than 96% with 8s or higher.

JH

The 1964 Topps should have a 100% fairly soon.... There are two of us that are just missing 13 cards out of the 587 in PSA 8 or better... and we only have an overlap of 2 cards in our want lists.....There are only two regularly recognized variations, and neither of them is included as a part of the registry....

Mitochondria

toppsgunn,

I would have to say that seeing 1963 Topps in high grade (without the color chipping) is pretty awesome. It is as if you are looking at 2 completely different sets (1963 low grade vs. 1963 high grade). I can understand the appeal of a PSA 8 1963 beyond simply the pop count, compared to a lower grade that may have worn border showing.

Ron

mikeschmidt

I know of way too many sets that are not registered to make it a complete analysis. Combined with the fact that we have some stalwarts like Davalillo, Rob Hobbs and others who have high-grade raw sets, with only the stars graded.

Wayne8348

Ray - great post. I think it probably has more to do with popularity. I personally am not crazy about the apperance of the 62's and 66's but I'm sure others feel differently. In reality, anybody with $5,000 can buy I fairly decent complete raw set from the 60's tomorrow and spend another $4,000+ to grade it and have a complete set. Granted, it may be much tougher to find a complete raw set in the 1969's, but other years aren't that difficult.

Since we're talking about complete sets if anybody can help me out with my last 5 cards I would really appreciate it. I need the following 1965 topps in psa 8 or better or raw and I will grade them:

21 Don Blasingame
109 Walt Bond
115 Bobby Richardson
200 Joe Torre
245 Joe Pepitone

I will be more than fair with the money's if you can be of any help.

Thanks,

Wayne

Mantlefan

I think the low completion rate for certain sets is due to availability rather than popularity. I love the 1962 set....wood grain and all, but look at the Pop numbers:

1961 PSA 8 - 20,425 cards

1962 PSA 8 - 11,232 cards

1963 PSA 8 - 16,203 cards

1964 PSA 8 - 10,943 cards

1965 PSA 8 - 14.772 cards

1966 PSA 8 - 8,688 cards

Fewer cards = fewer completd sets

toppsgun

Ron,

Yes, a non-chipped 1963 is a true beauty to behold. Problem is with PSA nowadays, even a speck of a chip (which wouldn't even show up on a white-bordered card) almost certainly knocks it down to PSA 7. I have a PSA 7 Berra that I'd be tickled to death to have 575 more of that set just like it. I showed it to the #1 collector on the Registry and he said it was better than his 8!! He considered trading me just to try and resubmit it. In the end, we both backed off.

Regarding all the sets of the 60's, I think it's safe to say the odd-numbered years have the best looking sets. The even-numbered years are either too plain or too far off the boundary.

1960-horizontal, alternating colors on block letters in player name (yuck) and no career stats on back.
1961-simple, uncluttered; no big rookies, but tough highs make it a challenge.
1962-just plain ugly to me and no career stats on back.
1963-two pictures in one, great use of color, easy to read backs.
1964-plain design and those block letters again, this time for the team name (at least no color change from letter to letter).
1965-waving team pennants in the wind, beautiful blue backs.
1966-odd looking team names diagonally across top corner. No second year Carlton, either.
1967-A Classic, uncluttered. Autographs a bonus (except for Milt Pappas...wondered what happened there?)
1968-Burlap sack borders, which changes from series one to series two. Ryan & Bench saves the set.
1969-Pretty clear and simple design, but just didn't resonate with me. It's got it's backers, though, for sure.

Ron, yours is a gorgeous set. I hope we both live long enough to see it complete.

Wayne8348

<< <i>I think the low completion rate for certain sets is due to availability rather than popularity.

Mantlefan:

I understand what you're saying but aren't more cards sent in for grading due to those cards either selling better or being more popular to collect? I think this is kind of the chicken or the egg kind of scenario. I believe there are lots of 62's worthy of grading but since their isn't a strong market for them, people don't submit them as often.

wayne

mikeschmidt

Also consider that the 1962 Topps set has a huge population of SGC-graded cards -- more than many other 1960s sets. I believe that there is a set/collector out there that has the majority of the set graded in SGC 92, 96 or 98. There are three or four presentation sets, I think, that have been graded by SGC.

Mantlefan

Mantlefan:

I understand what you're saying but aren't more cards sent in for grading due to those cards either selling better or being more popular to collect? I think this is kind of the chicken or the egg kind of scenario. I believe there are lots of 62's worthy of grading but since their isn't a strong market for them, people don't submit them as often.

wayne


I know in my case, the problem is a practical one. I've given up on trying for a Registry-quality 1962 set since I've sent in hundreds of cards to be graded with very few resulting PSA 8's. I even opened several 1962 packs and sent in the centered cards and most came back PSA 7's. The woodgrain borders are graded very harshly