Which set to do next?

corvette1340 · April 28, 2009 12:26AM

I've now done the '61, '64, and '65 Topps sets in average NM condition, some better/ a few worse. I'll probably start another one shortly and would like to know which one to pick. I've always loved the '59 set so I may try that one. I'm basically looking to do it in the same overall condition as the others. The other sets I've done have also contained graded and ungraded cards. I try to get a majority of the stars in graded condition depending on what deals I can get. I also buy many lots of good conditioned cards and pick the best and sell the ones I don't need in repackaged lots. Any suggestions?

MrVintage · April 28, 2009 12:41AM

I've always been a fan of 58 topps. I'm currently working on 62 topps and hope to finish it within the next few months.

scoutsout47 · April 28, 2009 12:44AM

1967 Topps would be in keeping with your overall theme thus far.

purduepete · April 28, 2009 12:46AM

Why don't you stay in the 60's and try the 67 set? I think it's the best looking set of the decade, and it shouldn't be too hard to find NM cards to match the rest of your sets. The high numbers might be a little tough to get though.

Good luck with whatever year you choose!

rbdjr1 · April 28, 2009 12:49AM

1968 Topps

lsutigers1973 · April 28, 2009 12:53AM

I've attempted the 1963 Fleer set twice, one time graded and the other NM or better raw. Fun chllenge on a small set mainly because it is hard to find the checklist in NRMT or better condition. Plus it is mostly HOF'ers.

billwaltonsbeard · April 28, 2009 12:56AM

Ever considered 89 Score?

RonBurgundy · April 28, 2009 1:02AM

82 Topps KMart is a winner in my book.

corvette1340 · April 28, 2009 1:20AM

as much as I love '89 Score and '82 Kmart, I don't think my budget will allow it.

yankeeno7 · April 28, 2009 1:26AM

67 and 68 at the same time. Why at the same time? I think 68s are quite affordable so it should fit in that budget

One can finish a 68 set quite quickly. The 67s may be a bit more of a journey due to the high numbers.

PoppaJ · April 28, 2009 1:53AM

Hi Tom,

1st of all, congrats on your completed sets .... especially the '65, one of my faves.

Sounds like your passion is leading you to the '59 set, which can be a rather enjoyable set to complete. Besides having three Mantles, four Mays and four Aarons (excluding Team Cards), the set also has a nice variety of other HOFers, stars and commons.

I think the only major rookie card of the '59 set is Bob Gibson, but also contains Sparky Anderson, Felipe Alou, Ford Frick, Norm Cash and maybe a couple others. This will certainly hold the price down a bit for you.

It's a large set, but NM commons can be purchased in large lots for under $10 per card.

As you know, part of the fun of completing sets is the time it takes to do it, so take your time and enjoy!

Good luck on whatever set you decide to tackle next

PoppaJ

TJMAC · April 28, 2009 11:04PM

Nice job on completing your sets. Share some pictures if you are get a chance. My vote is for 69 Topps. There is enough star power and has some nice looking 2nd years cards of Ryan and Bench. Also, the first card of Reggie and the last of the Mick. I had a lot of fun putting it together. You will find the 2nd series is the toughest, but overall it is fairly easy to acquire nice cards.

RonBurgundy · April 29, 2009 1:45AM

Good job on getting these sets done. I'm a fan of 64's you should post some scans for us!

IchiroDeported · April 29, 2009 5:42AM

68's are ugly. You dont want to be queasy whilst assembling the set, so I would suggest 67's which are colorful and pleasing to the eye.

WinPitcher · April 29, 2009 5:48AM

I'd love to see some 65's.

Steve

Mintacular · April 29, 2009 10:22AM

I'd go 63 Topps or anything 50's. The mid to late 60's sets are so vanilla (i.e. boring/plain). I used to like the '59s more than '58 but they seem so abundant I would go with the '58 at this point. The '62 Topps is too close to the awesome '55 Bowman wood-grain concept. 60 is nice but is overrated and is a horizontal copycat of '54. I think 66/67 are an abomination 68 looks like a picnic table cloth, and 69 is devoid of any creativity although the white letter variations are a cool thing to collect.

stevek · April 29, 2009 10:29AM

With the challenge of trying to find well centered cards, plus the variations and the beauty of the cards, for me it's tough to beat 62 Topps.

But I never met a 50's, 60's, or 70's Topps card I didn't like.

gregmo32 · April 29, 2009 11:46AM

1977 Topps Star Wars !

divecchia · April 29, 2009 12:17PM

<< <i>1967 Topps would be in keeping with your overall theme thus far. >>

I agree with the '67's.

Donato

rbdjr1 · April 29, 2009 12:49PM

<< <i>68's are ugly. You dont want to be queasy whilst assembling the set, so I would suggest 67's which are colorful and pleasing to the eye. >>

you know what they say, "there's a seat for every saddle" and "beauty is in the eye of the beholder"

rd

credits: bobsbbcards set registry photos

jimrad · April 29, 2009 12:56PM

59 or 60 would be great and they seem to have become more affordable lately.
IMHO the 67 and 68 sets are the ugliest ever produced.

Which set to do next?

Comments