Toughest 1969 Card

gemint · February 25, 2003 4:22AM

Now that a few Shannon's and Ferraro's have appeared on the market, I took a look at the pop report for the 1969 T baseball set to see what was the new toughest non-variation card in the set. That honor now belongs to #51 Mike Andrews with one 8 and one 9. All others have at least three 8's. There are still several that have zero 9's but all those have at least three 8's.

dude · February 25, 2003 4:28AM

John,

I have it in a 7. Yes it is tough. Actually, these discussions always seem to generate market activity. Maybe more Andrews cards will surface as a result.

Dan

gemint · February 25, 2003 4:34AM

Dan,

Your post reminded me that I should qualify my post with PSA 8 or better as the benchmark. There are 6 sevens of the Andrews. If you factor in PSA 7 or above, it may or may not be the toughest card in the set. I agree that highlighting a particular card always seems to bring more raw cards out of the woodwork and into PSA holders. In light of that, I guess I should be highlighting cards I still need!

FB · February 25, 2003 4:56AM

I think that if you have a bunch of 7's and very few 8's its also a good indicator that its a tough card. Most likely, those 7's have 8 or 9 corners but are off-centered enough to keep them from getting the grade. People are willing to take more chances on those cards by sending them in and hoping to "catch a break".

gemint · February 25, 2003 5:02AM

One of the problems I've seen on this card is print snow on the shirt sleeve. That's what knocked the previous card I owned down to a 7. I also see the same problem on raw cards I find for #51. Centering is also an issue to contend with. I think the combination of print snow and poor centering makes this a challenging card to find in high grade. I also notice that this card is often missing from set breakups I come across at shows. Perhaps this is partially due to Red Sox team collectors snapping the card up.

Stump · February 25, 2003 5:07AM

I agree the Andrews are tough. I have found now that I am above 85% the going is rough. I just got the 620 Chance. This card is 3/3/1
3-7's 3-8's and 1-9. Also the 68 Duncan 1/3/2 is rough. What also makes some of these cards tougher is the amount that are in registered sets. I took this into consideration when I started building and some are simply not avalible. Also on the list
111--1/4/1
152--3/4/0
176--2/3/2
182--0/4/1
300--0/4/1
655--1/5/0
This set is not like the 68's. The 1968 set was tough to finish but this 1969 is down right nasty in higher grade. The first 50% is easy the next 25% gets a little harder. The next 10% is expensive. The last 15% is a nightmare. I have alot of avenues to cards and a decent budget to spend but I have hit a brick wall on this set.

Dave

Mitochondria · February 25, 2003 5:47AM

In the 1969 set, there is always a danger of PSA 10s popping up in the 1st series due to the unopened material out there and the untapped vending. Nevertheless, it is quite remarkable that we have all seen a #110 (second series) Mike Shannon in PSA 9, but have yet to see a #85 Lou Brock (first series) in PSA 9.

For the first series, the #52 Mike Andrews (#51 is Woodie Fryman) is indeed tough. However, #8 (ERA Leaders), #25 (Roy White), #83 (Mike Ferraro), #102 (Jim Davenport) and #106 (Jim Hannan) are also challenging in the first series.

Ron

gemint · February 25, 2003 5:54AM

You're right Ron! Sorry about the wrong card number. It really is amazing with all the first series vending and cello plus a few racks from the first series that are out there that a Lou Brock PSA 9 has yet to be located. One vending box yielded a PSA 10 Aaron and Clemente but apparently no Brock's worthy of a 9. I wonder what happened to the commons from that find. I assume the PSA 9 Andrews I picked up from Bob Cacamese came from his stash of vending. Perhaps a repeat of the Ferraro will occur where that card went from 0 population in 8+ to four in a short period of time.

Dave,

I'm glad you confirm the 1968 set is not as tough since I am starting to focus some attention on that set. What were the toughest cards for you to locate in that set?

pc · February 25, 2003 7:17AM

<< <i>In the 1969 set, there is always a danger of PSA 10s popping up in the 1st series due to the unopened material out there and the untapped vending. Nevertheless, it is quite remarkable that we have all seen a #110 (second series) Mike Shannon in PSA 9, but have yet to see a #85 Lou Brock (first series) in PSA 9.

For the first series, the #52 Mike Andrews (#51 is Woodie Fryman) is indeed tough. However, #8 (ERA Leaders), #25 (Roy White), #83 (Mike Ferraro), #102 (Jim Davenport) and #106 (Jim Hannan) are also challenging in the first series.

Ron >>

here ya go
team's best hitter at .267

Caramels · February 25, 2003 8:17AM

Dave >>

Stump,you have sniped and outbid me as many times as I have Ron! Please refrain from bidding on e-bay for 90 days!

Stump · February 25, 2003 8:20AM

John

Unlike the 69 set were most of the leaders are easy(except 2,5,8) The leader cards in 68 are tough. I just got 51.00 for a PSA 7 #2.
Also it seems the dual rookie cards are tough in higher grades. 36,56,76,96. Off center is the culprit. Other than that the usual Mets and Yankees plus the following.
112 Fryman
172 Williams
193 Hamilton
199 A's Rookies
246 Peterson
282 Monday
285 MaCauliffe
360 Horton
441 Johnson
453 Ellis
Most of the Tigers are sought after because they won the series that year. Alot of guys seem to collect them plus they are tough in nine.
I may have missed a few but I think I listed most. Thanks to Dan Markel for the Fryman 8. He knew he could of got more on ebay but sold it to me at a very sexy price. Once again he is proof the guys on this board are stand up guys with integrity. Soory to get off the 69's but they are killing me. I have enough in route to get to 89% but the going is rough. I do have a SGC 88 #102 a SGC 92 #176 and a SGC 92 #195 I am sending to PSA. I believe they will all be 8's. I will be satisfied if they are.

Dave

gemint · February 25, 2003 9:36AM

Thanks for the info Dave. I'll have to check my set and hope those cards are NM/MT. That Fryman is the ultimate irony. It's one of the easiest cards in the 1969 set. Anyone want to trade their 1968 PSA 8 Fryman for my 1969 PSA 8 Fryman?

Virtualizard · February 25, 2003 10:20AM

Gemint,

I checked my set. I have a really nice '68 Fryman - centering is a little off but the corners look nice

:

Seriously, I do have some nice '68s. I haven't even thought about starting to get this set graded. I would like to hear more '69 Topps discussions though. That's the next set I'm going to focus on. Thanks for all of the expert opinions in advance.

JEB.

dude · February 25, 2003 10:41AM

Stump,

Thank you for the kind words on the '68 Fryman transaction. In 2002, you bought more '68s from me than any other collector so that's the least I could do for you. If I make any money on a sale, it typically goes back into buying something for my collection. So you've helped me build my collection as well. Thanks.

RayBShotz · February 25, 2003 11:23AM

Ahhh - gemint; 69's my favorite topic. This set garners this type of talk like no other. A testament to those of us gutting it out.

dave - Congrats on the Chance! Tough hogh number when so many of them are matter of fact. The set has an amazing makeup. Upwards of a hundred really easy card in high grade but equally as many really tough ones. You are dead right on that last 15%. I am stuck also. I have resorted to upgrading a lot of my weaker grades as I frustratingly yield to the aggressive bidding nature of the competition on the gloriously tough cards herein!

Ron - The Brock thing is really quite amazing! Like mentioned before on close inspection many Brock's have a tiny amount of snow that can keep the rare centered Brock from a 9. just one of the many affilctions the Brock suffers. I still dont own a nice Brock myself. I will also agree that that 8 Leaders card is awfully tough.

this is the type of thread that keeps me collecting PSA and makes it possible to look forward to finally meeting up with you guys; my collecting friends at the summer Nationals.

Lets keep this valued 69' chat alive!

RayB69Topps
aja4rayb@msn.com

gemint · February 25, 2003 12:58PM

Well I checked my set and found about 1/4 of the tough cards to be NM/MT or better. Dave, most of my 1st series rookie stars that you highlighted are diamond cut. I assume that is the common problem with them. I've also heard the #384 Reds rookies is always O/C too, as mine is. Here's my Fryman which should grade out an 8...

Virtualizard, LOL! I think you have the ultra rare '68 Topps Super Test issue. Since they came with rounded corners, you should get a 9OC!

Stump · February 25, 2003 7:31PM

John/Ray Just picked up the leaders cards 2 and 8 both in PSA 8. They are on their way to me and I cant wait to see them. The brock has aluded me several times but I learned my lesson on it last time.

Caramels
Sorry about the sniping. I learned that here on the boards and it has saved me money and I have won more auctions. I have slowed on the 68's. I have enough coming to put me at 8.75. I also am stalled somewhat on the 69's as I get closer. I won the Neikro 43 last night and that should put me close to 90%. I know that last ten% will be tough as nails and I will need to submit some. I have about 25 of the cards ready for submission but many will grade less than 8.

Jeb

Hey why dont you submit the Fryman and see if PSA will give a new qualifier. It may come back as a 8R. R for round. Some people like round.

John The fryman looks good. Should have no problem on the eight and yes on the rookies. They are always diamond cut. The reds 384 is a tough card. I got lucky on that card early. It seems there are more people in the 68 set now than when I started. The low pop nines are selling for better than 100.00. I had the unfortune to go head to head with Ron. That was fun.. I never beat him once. I finally quit bidding on hois auctions and waited till the next one came up. Saved him money and me time. Good luck on your submissions.

Dave

Aaronman · February 26, 2003 2:43AM

I haven't bothered to get any of my 69's graded yet. I am about 70% complete (5% graded, 65% raw). I am not ready to take the grading plunge yet. Does anyone out there have the 69 Yaz in a 9 (#130)? Can you email me a scan (drivard@optonline.net)? I have been really struggling to find a nice 8. There are not many of those either.

Doug

gemint · February 26, 2003 2:51AM

<< <i>I haven't bothered to get any of my 69's graded yet. I am about 70% complete (5% graded, 65% raw). I am not ready to take the grading plunge yet. Does anyone out there have the 69 Yaz in a 9 (#130)? Can you email me a scan (drivard@optonline.net)? I have been really struggling to find a nice 8. There are not many of those either.

Doug >>

If you're willing to shell out some serious cash for one, you can own this one:

Yaz Auction

SportsCardMan · February 26, 2003 9:32AM

Stump:

We have got to stop bidding against each other for those PSA 9 69's. I'm trying to get them for a bargain and you keep running the price up.

Now I find out that I am bidding against Stump & Gaspipe. Is there any chance that I will get any of these cards?

Stump · February 26, 2003 12:45PM

Sportscardman

Your going to have to ask just a little nicer. Is your set registered? Sorry about the auctions I get a little agressive when I need a card for my set. Email me.

Dave

OhioTaz · February 27, 2003 12:35AM

The 69T activity has been brisk lately! 11 of the top 13 sets on the Registry are showing Updated tags. More than 50 sets registered. Amazing.

Stump · February 27, 2003 2:41AM

Its a great set with alot of diffaculty. Finishing every card in eight or better is going to be hard. I need 81 more cards and I am there. The more posts we havfe on this subject it seems the more raw cards get graded and become avalible.

Dave

srs1a · February 27, 2003 3:02AM

Congratulations Stump on edging your '68 set into 2nd place -- the first 3 sets are absolutely amazing. Now, you've got some work to do to move into first! I'm still waiting to see an upgrade to #5...I'm wondering if the candidate didn't cross ???

Scott

OhioTaz · February 27, 2003 3:18AM

I just picked up 24 upgrades from 8 to 9 in the last week or so on Ebay. All fairly high-pop except #181, 264, 307, 331, 377. The card I was most happy to find was #3 though. I know that it has a pop of 13 in PSA 9 with no 10's but it seems like it rarely comes up for sale. I had to pay multiples of SMR to get it in a 9.

The Steve Carlton and Bob Gibson always are overpriced compared to SMR as well.

Taz

Stump · February 27, 2003 5:04AM

Scott

If you are referring to the #5 card I still have the SGC 92. I am waiting for the new special. I have about 40 SGC 92's and 96's for 68 and 69. Some real tough ones in the 69's. Including two Briles a Neikro a Gagliano two Davenports and a azcue. I also have a SGC 98 Phillies Rookies #348 from the 68 set. I have also 73 upgrades coming for the 68 set including a Rose in nine.

Taz

Great job on the upgrades you should see a jump in your GPA. I also have some nines coming for the 69's. I was able to pick up 4 1 of 1's including #87 clarke. I hope to add scans soon. I finally got the 40 Mayo Smith and the 43 Neikro in eight. I lost on these cards probably 4 times in the last 3-4 months. Good luck with the set.

Dave(stump)

gemint · February 27, 2003 7:33AM

<< <i>Scott

I finally got the 40 Mayo Smith and the 43 Neikro in eight. I lost on these cards probably 4 times in the last 3-4 months. Good luck with the set.

Dave(stump) >>

I literally "lost" #40 in PSA 8. I had won it, along with a PSA 8 Horton AS and the darn package never arrived. Fortunately the seller insured the shipment. I was able to win those cards in future auctions for about half the price! So in the end, I lucked out.

Stump · February 27, 2003 11:13AM

literally "lost" #40 in PSA 8. I had won it, along with a PSA 8 Horton AS and the darn package never arrived. Fortunately the seller insured the shipment. I was able to win those cards in future auctions for about half the price! So in the end, I lucked out.

Wow that is a story. Both tough cards I am glad it worked out.

Dave

Toughest 1969 Card

Comments