1964 or 1965 Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

Dialj

Well, I have decided on the 1974 set for my 70's set and have to make a decision on the 60's set. I am down to the 64 and 65 set to choose from. I would like to hear the boardmembers thoughts on the pro's and con's for these two sets.

James

yankeeno7

65s by a long shot....rookies and photo asthetics are much much better than 64s. If you do 64s, you will miss out on rookies of Carlton, Perez, Morgan, Hunter, McGraw, Petrocelli, Stottlemyre to name some of the better ones. The only thing that 64s have on the 65s are the multiplayer special cards.

fiveniner

If you want EASY go with the 64.The set however has little long term growth.Cards are easier to find however you will have a challange of finding 64s without the back illistration rubbed off.High #s are not tough to find as in the other 60s sets.
The 65 is a winner all the way.You will have rookies of Morgan,Carlton,Hunter,Perez,McGraw.The High #s offer a challange as there are may single print cards which are difficult to find.The set is very popular among collectors.

PowderedH2O

I concur with both. Plus, quite frankly, the 1965's are just plain purrty.

Downtown1974

My vote is for the 65 set as well.

Darin

I like 1964. I picked out a dozen star cards from 64 and that's my micro mini set. Probably an underrated set, I like the different color schemes.

Robby

My vote is for 1964 ..................I'm very biased towards this set , as I have a set on the Registry ' Robbie's 1964 Topps Set ' ! I have scans of almost the whole set if you want to take a look ! Looking at E-Bay prices for the set in Psa 8 , I really don't see that much of a difference ! True , the '65 set has more rookie Hall of Famers ! The '64 set has Phil Niekro .............future HOF's to be ........Lou Piniella and Tony LaRussa rookie cards .....................Pete Rose's iconic 2nd year card ................the '64 Mantle blows the '65 Mantle away , and you can get it for a lot better price ! For me , the 1964 set is more colorful and the players pictures just seem to leap out of the card board at you ! If you are a Cardinal fan , this was the year they got Lou Brock in the most famous lop-sided trade ever and went on to capture the National League pennant in one of the most famous finish's in history ( until this year , that is .......very similar seasons , '64 and 2011 ) and went on to beat the Yankee's in 7 games ! My first World Series Championship as a fan ! I was 13 years old ........so yeah , the '64 set holds a special place in my heart !
Check out the star cards like Clemente , Rose , Mays , Kaline , Brooks and Frank Robinson , Killebrew , Yaz , and Koufax , etc. ......and compare them to the 1965 cards ! Decide which years look the best to you ! Regardless of which set you choose , you can't go wrong with either one ! Value wise , the sets are equal !
Dave ' Robbie ' Robinson

JoeBanzai

65 All Day Long. The 64's are "washed out" looking to me.

ThoseBackPages

i vote '65

bking

I think they are both colorful, great-looking sets. They both are almost the same VCP in PSA 7 too, so it's really a toughie. My decision was made when I was handed a large lot of mid-grade 65's, but I'm not sure what I would pick without that starter kit.

JustinsShoebox

Gonna have to throw my vote into the '65 hat.

I love the Maris and Mantle cards in this set...as well as the Perez.

When it comes to my Mathews sets, I actually enjoy looking at the '64 more.

It's a mix for me, but overall I say 65.

Justin

Nathaniel1960

Collect the stars from 65 and the set for 64.

Also, it has not been my epxerience that 65 hi # sp's are that tuff.

As for RCs, 64 does have Niekro (HOF), LaRussa (soon to be HOF), Conigliaro, Tommy John and Dick Allen. Not as impressive as 65, but not that far off.

And the multi-player cards are fantastic.

70ToppsFanatic

Both are nice sets. If you decide to go with 1964 I have an extra partial set with many of the stars that is mostly
from vending available at a decent price. It's around 500 cards and I sent in about 50 or so that came back in the 7ish range.

fkw

64s are tougher in higher grade because of the coin scratchoff on the backs of some cards

I like the 1964 set much better, cleaner look w/o that gaudy pennant design that dominates the '65 set

WalterSobchak

I would choose the '64 set, but it's a pretty close call.

What made up your mind that '74 was the 1970's set you wanted to collect? In my opinion, that is the second-least appealing Topps baseball set of the '70s, behind only the '79 set.

lostdart58

'65!!!

jmmiller777

1965 all day long! It was the first of the 60's set I put together. It shouldn't be that hard to get hi numbers. The 69 set would be the easiest tho...

ThoseBackPages

<< <i>64s are tougher in higher grade because of the coin scratchoff on the backs of some cards

I like the 1964 set much better, cleaner look w/o that gaudy pennant design that dominates the '65 set >>



Where is Frank, and is he OK? lol

heritage

I like each of them but if i could only pick one i will go with the 65 set...

Dialj

Thanks for all the input so far. All the comments have been made note of, and I will refer back to them on a regular basis. I am really torn between the two sets because I actually like both designs. I have consider putting both of them together, because I am in not hurry to complete either one. I will look to complete them in best possible grade I can, but nothing lower than PSA 7. I am currently moving from Germany back to the States ( thanks to Uncle Sam), so I have a few weeks to think about before I hit the ground running.

The 74 set was pretty simple for me to choose, because it is the only 70's set I don't own.

James

Dialj

On the 1964's, I know the unscratched backs would be a lot less available (probably in any grade), but are they so rare that it is not worth the hunt?

Robby

<< <i>On the 1964's, I know the unscratched backs would be a lot less available (probably in any grade), but are they so rare that it is not worth the hunt? >>



Are you wanting to buy raw cards off of E-Bay to submit to Psa ? If so , the hunt may be a little more difficult , but by no means are they rare or harder to find ! You would have no problem finding raw Psa 7 to 8 quality cards to submit if you wanted to ! Occasionally , you will even find mint cards ! Still lots of cards out there to be found ! It still amaze's me how much material survived from the 50's and 60's in nm-mt condition !
Robbie

bking

Isn't just about the only thing that makes it possible to collect these 60's sets in high grade the discovery of vending/unopened stashes over the years? I would think that makes the scratchoff problem a little less of an issue as compared to cards that were actually collected back in the day. Am I way off there?

markj111

Do what I did-both of them. I need a 1965 Charlie Smith in PSA 8 to have both years in 8 (a few higher). I'm thinking of selling off some of the commons as I need more room.

lilmule

Dialj

I vote for 65. Currentely I am putting together a 65 set in all PSA 8 and 9's if you have any doubles or I have any doubles we could try to help out each other on the set.

Mike