Home› PSA Set Registry Forum

1954 Topps Gene Woodling #101 PSA 8 - Set Registry Mania!

bleacherbumbleacherbum Posts: 113 ✭✭
in PSA Set Registry Forum
Just when I was starting to feel queasy about the prices for low pop 1971's, I was trolling through ebay and saw this card. With 42 minutes remaining, it's currently @ $1,377.00. I checked the pop report and there are 13 8's out there. Now I don't feel so bad about collecting 1971's.

Comments

  • interchangesinterchanges Posts: 864 ✭
    Makes me wonder what the all time prices realized would be for commons cards.
    1952 Pafko PSA 10 probably takes the cake.
    Herman Weihmier from the same set (first PSA 8) is up there.
    Or wasn't there a 1933 Goudey Bengough PSA 9 in a Mastro auction a few years ago? Or was that a figment of my imagination?
  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Makes me wonder what the all time prices realized would be for commons cards.
    1952 Pafko PSA 10 probably takes the cake.
    Herman Weihmier from the same set (first PSA 8) is up there.
    Or wasn't there a 1933 Goudey Bengough PSA 9 in a Mastro auction a few years ago? Or was that a figment of my imagination? >>



    Interchanges:

    I question the above in reference to the 1952 Pafko. Ask Branca what he is willing to pay for a PSA 8 to upgrade his 1952 Topps set. Then compare that price to what the 10 cost. I think the multiple for the 10 over the 8 would be exceptionally low.
    I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
  • RayBShotzRayBShotz Posts: 1,088
    I believe the Woodling is like the second toughest 54' behind the Mills. Still; quite incredible.
    RayB69Topps
    Never met a Vintage card I didn't like!
  • DavalilloDavalillo Posts: 1,846 ✭✭
    Ray,

    Really? How about the Wade?

    And Interchanges, I wouldn't call Pafko a common.

    Dav
  • VarghaVargha Posts: 2,392 ✭✭
    He's a "common" in other sets. But he is a #1 card in the 1952 Topps set, and first and last cards aren't usually lumped in as commons. Bengough certainly meets the first card criteria as well. If it weren't for that designation however, they would both be mere commons.
  • interchangesinterchanges Posts: 864 ✭
    I consider a common a card of a player who is not a super star, or even a semi-star. I know The Pafko card itself isn't a card of common staus, but as a player he's common, and that's what I though a common meant. Common player.

    Marc, I said prices realized, not what someone was willing to pay.
    (cute kid)

    GO PATS!!! Cover 6 1/2 points and I can get some more T205's!

    Scott
  • DavalilloDavalillo Posts: 1,846 ✭✭
    Common refers to whether he is broken out separately in a price guide not whether he is a common player.
  • NickMNickM Posts: 4,895 ✭✭✭
    Broken out separately in a price guide is still a relative term. Pafko cards are listed at a slight premium to true commons in other sets - mainly because he had a fairly lengthy career and had a fan base. Of course, he's also a Dodger in '52 Topps, which attracts its own premium.

    Nick
    image
    Reap the whirlwind.

    Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
  • purelyPSApurelyPSA Posts: 712 ✭✭
    There was a '61 Rollie Sheldon that went for 2k+ in PSA 9 a month or two ago.
Sign In or Register to comment.