1954 Topps

HECK55 · December 19, 2005 1:42PM

Anyone know why the #101 Gene Woodling in 1954 Topps runs $1100 -$1200 in PSA 8? Population shows 25 of 180 graded I think. I didn't write it down so I might be wrong there. I do Topps 53's and there are several with about the same population that do not seem to get that high and maybe some lower pops that run in that price range. Do more people collect 54's maybe than 53's and cause the prices to run higher? Just curious as I was considering working on this set and would like to know a little more about it. Thanks - - - Rick

thesplendidsplinter · December 19, 2005 1:53PM

The Ben Wade # 126 can go for more!! Those 2 cards have notorious histories as some of the toughest cards to get. If you try to build the set, the Aaron, Kaline & Banks will come way before those 2. Really tough.

HECK55 · December 19, 2005 2:24PM

Thanks for the reply. I just picked up a few cards from the 54 set that look nice and thought I might get a start even if it was a little weak to consider it enough to call a "start" - always liked the 54's but then I still have a long way to go on my 53 set. My wife is always on my case for not staying focused on one thing! Wonder where she gets that? Rick

Machodoc · December 19, 2005 3:09PM

I just finished the 1954 set, and made a decision early on the buy as many 8's as possible but to eschew the really tough commons. It really doesn't make any sense to pay a grand for a PSA 8 common when you can apply that $ to a PSA 8 Aaron, Banks, Kaline, etc... If you are hell bent on an all-8 set, then God Bless, but be prepared to spend cash way out of proportion to the benefit recieved. I paid only $58 for a wonderful PSA 7 Woodling and have no plans to upgrade it. Be competitive if you want (nothing wrong with it), but an extremely nice set will cost a lot less if you are willing to pop in a few strategic 7's here and there.

SW

bobsbbcards · December 19, 2005 8:21PM

What Steve said.

HECK55 · December 20, 2005 3:09AM

I am with you on getting 7's instead of high dollar commons. And that is a nice 7 on the Woodling too. I have done the same on my 53 set with intention of upgrading some of them later as some of the ones I have put in that are 7's are what I have recieved from my grading submissions and are not really rare just the fact that a 7 and 8 set is still a really nice set.
My question on the high price of the Woodling is that it has a population of 25 of 180 or something close to that - I can't remember exactly at the moment. In my past experience with the 53's approx. 33% of the total submitted on the majority of the cards will end up as 8's once there are enough sent in to get a true idea of how they will sort out on average. Maybe the real low grades - say 4 and down should not be considered on the total number though as they would not have had any consideration of being an 8 to begin with.
Anyway, 25 8's out of 180 just does not make the card a real rare card in my opinion. It would seem to me that a card with 10% graded an 8 might be getting into the range that this card lists for in SMR. I did not look to see if this one had any 9's or 10's but if it does then that would seem to drop the big money on the 8 down even more.
As you said though: "Buy a seven and be happy" and I can do that. Just trying to understand the reasoning behind the value in SMR.
It is probably demand even if it is a little bit false due to typical Ebay/auction competition. Maybe the number of people building the set keeps the demand higher.
Rick

HECK55 · December 20, 2005 4:03AM

Evidently low population is not the reason for the SMR to reflect the higher value for the #101 and the #126.

54546 1954 Topps cards graded
12151 of those graded eights
13 cards graded 8 with a population of 25 or less.
#101 has 25 8's and SMR in an 8 is $1200.00 - I didn't write down #126 pop in an 8 but I believe it was less than #101. It lists at $2000
#157 - pop of 22 lists at $75.00
#182 - pop of 22 lists at $75.00
#227 - pop of 15 lists at $75.00

I do not know what these three cards usually sell for but I bet it is a lot more than $75.00 each.

I have noticed that in the 1953 set it is a similar pricing standard with a couple of the lower pop cards getting a lot higher dollar value while the others remain at commons price or close to it. PSA is hesitant to recognize some cards as low popualation while they will others. May be another reason for it but I do not know what it is.

Rick

1954 Topps

Comments