Home› Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
Options

1933 Goudey vs 1952 Topps

CardsForMSCardsForMS Posts: 255
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
Which one and why.. discuss

Comments

  • billwaltonsbeardbillwaltonsbeard Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭✭
    52 Topps has the reach and age advantage, but the 33 Goudeys have the experience.

    hmm....I'll say 52 topps with a TKO in 12.
    My cards on COMC
  • incugatorincugator Posts: 622
    1933 Goudey. It is the only full "real set" that includes a lot of the best players from the 20's and 30's from their playing days. Most of the 52 topps set has rookies that were already printed in 51 bowman. The Eddie Mathews card is nearly impossible (the Lajoie is an arguement as a 33 or 34) and the 1 Mantle goes for the price of all 4 Ruth and 2 Gehrig cards. Plus, most of these players were printed many times over again in other great 1950's sets.

    Side Note: 52 Topps doesn't include Stan Musial (one of the top 5 players of the Era)

    52 Topps is very nice, but I take 33 Goudey KO 5 Rounds
    -Ryan
  • rube26105rube26105 Posts: 10,225 ✭✭
    i like em all,,bowman, chicle, diamond stars,beautiful artwork on the oldiesimage
  • jimradjimrad Posts: 2,777 ✭✭✭
    1933 Goudey a knockout 20 seconds into the first round.
    Positive transactions with: Bkritz,Bosox1976,Brick,captainthreeputt,cpettimd,craigger,cwazzy,DES1984,Dboneesq,daddymc,Downtown1974,EAsports,EagleEyeKid,fattymacs,gameusedhoop,godblessUSA,goose3,KatsCards,mike22y2k,
    MULLINS5,1966CUDA,nam812,nightcrawler,OAKESY25,PowderedH2O,relaxed,RonBurgundy,samsgirl214,shagrotn77,swartz1,slantycouch,Statman,Wabittwax
  • fattymacsfattymacs Posts: 2,581 ✭✭✭
    I vote 33 Goudeys, as a kid collecting back in the early 80's I thought they were as cool as could be, 52 Topps were easily obtainable. I prefer 53's to 52 Topps and 54's would be 3rd followed by 56 which has fallen out of favor with me.
  • fkwfkw Posts: 1,766 ✭✭
    Both are overrated.

    Id take the R318 set (1934 Batter Up) before the R319 set (1933 Goudey) as far as being unique and attractive.

    I like the look of the 1952 Topps cards, but they are as common as dirt compared to any PreWar card (paper drives in WWII destroyed most older cards).

    To me rarity is a big +, and both of these sets fall well short of being considered rare or even scarce. Both are very common overall for their age.
  • WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    What set isn't over rated?

    Steve
    Good for you.
  • SDSportsFanSDSportsFan Posts: 5,174 ✭✭✭✭✭
    1933 Goudeyimage

    The only thing that can possibly beat four different Babe Ruths, is four different Ty Cobbs in the T206 set. Even then, I think The Babe might win. Then again, Ty's got a lot of help in T206.


    Steve
  • StopYurWhiningStopYurWhining Posts: 719
    1933.
  • PowderedH2OPowderedH2O Posts: 2,443 ✭✭

    "What set isn't overrated?"

    I think the 1986 and 1990 Topps baseball sets are not overrated.

    I like both 1933 and 1952, but I am a realist. I can afford neither.
    Successful dealings with shootybabitt, LarryP, Doctor K, thedutymon, billsgridirongreats, fattymacs, shagrotn77, pclpads, JMDVM, gumbyfan, itzagoner, rexvos, al032184, gregm13, californiacards3, mccardguy1, BigDaddyBowman, bigreddog, bobbyw8469, burke23, detroitfan2, drewsef, jeff8877, markmac, Goldlabels, swartz1, blee1, EarlsWorld, gseaman25, kcballboy, jimrad, leadoff4, weinhold, Mphilking, milbroco, msassin, meteoriteguy, rbeaton and gameusedhoop.
  • BlackborderBlackborder Posts: 2,797 ✭


    << <i>What set isn't over rated?

    Steve >>




    54 Bowman
  • WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    Are we sure?


    Steve
    Good for you.
Sign In or Register to comment.