What is the toughest rookie card of the 1960s?

[1963Topps Set]

The hardest one to get.. or the most expensive?

1963 Topps Rose
1967 Topps Seaver
1968 Topps Ryan
1969 Topps Jackson

Or is there one I missed?

[KCRfan1]

They're all easily found.

Assuming each card has the same grade and qualities, the Rose card likely is the most expensive followed by Ryan, Seaver and Jackson.

Johnny Bench might be the best value though.

[Rich Klein]

1962 Uecker
1966 Grant Jackson

No 1960's card is impossible -- just sometimes hard to find at reasonable prices

[bobbyw8469]

Bob Gibson is tough to find centered. If you look OUTSIDE of baseball, the Wilt Chamberlain rookie is a beast.

[bobbyw8469]

And don't forget...the Joe Namath rookie in football is my bet for the most expensive one of them all.

[Republicaninmass]

Stargell looks pretty expensive, at least the signed ones

[1963Topps Set]

I would of thought the 1967 Topps Seaver would be the toughest. It is a high number in the rough high number series of 1967 Topps and I believe a single print. It always appears here on everyone's want list.

[mckinneyj]

My top 2 would be also the 66 G Jackson and 62 Uecker - maybe not as expensive as the bigger stars but seemingly much scarcer. Out of the big stars I'd guess that Seaver is the most difficult to find followed by Rose.

[profholt82]

The 60 Yaz, while quite common, is tough to find in nm condition. I find that the ink is almost always smeared.

[rats60]

The Seaver is easily the toughest of those. Ryans are common. Jacksons are easy too. I agree that the Grant Jackson would be the toughest of all. After the Seaver, Rose, Stargell and Uecker, but 62 and 63 high numbers aren't as tough as 61, 66 and 67. Don't forget about the 67 Carew, even though it is a DP.

[lowpopper]

Value aside, Seaver got em all beat. It's not even close.

[1963Topps Set]

The 1967 Topps Seaver card was the last card I needed to complete the decade of the 1960s! I remember when the 1965 Topps Carlton rookie was hot stuff and very valuable, must that must of fallen off the radar by now?

[pclpads]

'66T Choo Choo Coleman.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by pclpads

'66T Choo Choo Coleman.

Hey, don't besmirch Choo Choo!! I sent one of mine in and got an 8.

[glynparson]

Seaver i think he's tougher than uecker or grant jackson. like said earlier no regular issue 60s topps card is really all that difficult. ps choo choo coleman's rookie is not the sp 66 high number.

[toppcat]

The Seaver is a beast to find without a tilt. Just not many out there. I suspect one half sheet had all the tilted ones on it and the more centered/straight ones appeared on the other half sheet.

[mrmopar]

Being a Dodger collector, I still have not added Ken McMullen or Bart Shirley rookies!

[Bigdaddy]

I have to agree with Seaver. In addition to being a tough '67 High #, he's a HOFer and a Met/Red, which most certainly increase the demand for the card and making it harder to locate.

[glynparson]

There was a time i owned a 100 Jackson/Shirley rookies, i think it was actually 93 but i haven't owned that many seavers in my life and i have been buying and selling since 1979.

[Iwantmorecards77]

Recently sold one of each of those rookies and did quite well. Sharp, strong-centered Jackson rookies do very, very well.

[JTysver]

The Ryan rookie is very common. Reggie's Rookie is also fairly easy.
Rose is harder to find and it is a high number, but '63 highs are not nearly as rare as other years. The Grant Jackson rookie is kind of an artificial market. Its a 66 high, which makes it hard, but I don't think its anymore rare than Choo-Choo Coleman.
Seaver's rookie is pretty difficult to find and you can't really find a beat up version of it for anywhere less than $200. It may be the hardest to find. The funny thing is, you can find a poor conditioned one selling for $200 and you can find an ExMt version selling for $550. There pretty much isn't as wide of a price range on it, due to the fact that the lower conditioned ones are more expensive.

Some of the 1962 High number rookies like Joe Pepitone and Uecker are pretty difficult to find and much harder to find in really nice condition.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by toppcat

The Seaver is a beast to find without a tilt. Just not many out there. I suspect one half sheet had all the tilted ones on it and the more centered/straight ones appeared on the other half sheet.

Not much tilt here, though I was thinking about upgrading it but have not found the right 7, it's tough.

[Marchillo]

I think I am going to grab the Uecker RC with the 15% off eBay - I have most of the cards that people have mentioned minus the Seaver (which is currently out of my price range).

It's a VGEX version - that's my wheelhouse and budgetary constraints!

[BillP]

Lately, it's card #496 Dalkowski rookie card w/ 3 other guys. So my question to my friends out there is this: I know the 6th series of 1963 is the tougher of the 2 high numbers and selected cards, 469 hook, 484 long for 2 are flagged as SP. But why this card? Not even in any publications as tough. A NM version right now on ebay going for much more than Clemente. Is this a case of the 64 flood or the 66 grant Jackson hoarding?
comments welcome. billp

[Marchillo]

Originally Posted by BillP

Lately, it's card #496 Dalkowski rookie card w/ 3 other guys. So my question to my friends out there is this: I know the 6th series of 1963 is the tougher of the 2 high numbers and selected cards, 469 hook, 484 long for 2 are flagged as SP. But why this card? Not even in any publications as tough. A NM version right now on ebay going for much more than Clemente. Is this a case of the 64 flood or the 66 grant Jackson hoarding?
comments welcome. billp

I got that and McNally from a member here. Not perfect cards but a very fair price.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...errerid=621627

They were 2 of the last 5-10 cards I got including Clemente and Rose
The

[rsdill2]

Originally Posted by Marchillo

I got that and McNally from a member here. Not perfect cards but a very fair price.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...errerid=621627

They were 2 of the last 5-10 cards I got including Clemente and Rose
The

you're welcome

Back to the OP's question - there's quite a few random '60s rookies that can be tough to locate and consistently realize higher prices than one would expect (off the top of my head - '62 RC Parades, '63 Dalkowski, '66 Cards RCS, '66 G Jackson, '67 Sutherland, '67 Shellenback). But to me, the Seaver and Rose are definitely the toughest. 1 and 1(a) but if I had to rank them I'd say Seaver was the toughest for me to find in a condition I was happy with, then Rose...although the Rose does sell for more than the Seaver.

[ls7plus]

Toughest Topps rookie card of the '60's, period? Aside from the regular issues, the 1969 Topps Super printer's proof Reggie Jackson. I have one, obtained a number of years ago from Steve Verkman, and have only seen one other come up since, either in an REA or Heritage auction about 4-6 years ago (PSA, I believe, subsequently stopped grading printer's proofs).

Best to all,

Larry

[h2oya311]

Hardest 1960s rookies (stretching the boundaries a little):

1967 Cincinnati Reds Team Issue PC - Johnny Bench:


1963 Houston Colt 45s Team Issue - Joe Morgan:


1963-64 UNC-Dominican "Album" card - Phil Niekro:


1965 Baltimore Orioles Team Issue PC - Jim Palmer:


1963 Cincinnati Reds Team Issue PC - Pete Rose:


1969 Topps Test Issue - Bowie Kuhn:


For those that I don't own, I'd love to acquire a 1966 Pro's Pizza of Fergie Jenkins. I saw one years ago at auction and haven't seen another since. I'd also love a 1963 San Diego Team Issue (8"x10") of Tony Perez. Hint, hint!

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by Marchillo

I got that and McNally from a member here. Not perfect cards but a very fair price.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...errerid=621627

They were 2 of the last 5-10 cards I got including Clemente and Rose
The

That's why back in the day at Beckett. we preferred looking at uncut sheets to help with the SP and DP notations. I have told the story on a few occasions about the 1961 5th series in which our suppositions about the SP's (Maz, Skowron, etc) were proved when I saw an uncut sheet at a Nassau Coliseum show in 1993.

I suspect the Dalkowski is a SP, I remember buying one from a board member here and it sold when graded at the very next show after getting it back from the grading company.

Tresh is also well known for being tough in that series as well as Lou Brock. I suspect there is one group of 11 cards which are SP's in the 6th series.

And if you really want a tougher RC which is kind of, sort of at least related to the standard Topps cards there are

1968 Venezuelan Nolan Ryan

1965 O-Pee-Chee Murakami

Rich

[stlcardsfan]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

That's why back in the day at Beckett. we preferred looking at uncut sheets to help with the SP and DP notations. I have told the story on a few occasions about the 1961 5th series in which our suppositions about the SP's (Maz, Skowron, etc) were proved when I saw an uncut sheet at a Nassau Coliseum show in 1993.

I suspect the Dalkowski is a SP, I remember buying one from a board member here and it sold when graded at the very next show after getting it back from the grading company.

Tresh is also well known for being tough in that series as well as Lou Brock. I suspect there is one group of 11 cards which are SP's in the 6th series.

And if you really want a tougher RC which is kind of, sort of at least related to the standard Topps cards there are

1968 Venezuelan Nolan Ryan

1965 O-Pee-Chee Murakami

Rich

The '63 Bill Freeman RC is kind of tough also from that series.

[parkerj33]

Great point Rich Klein...but to really know you have to have BOTH halves of the uncut sheets (264 cards total)....the A and B sides are often slightly different in their row layout.

[Rookiemonster]

This is definitely not my area of knowledge. But I’ve always been to under the impression that 1966 Topps had a lot of SPs. I know the Seaver is a hard to get because of the price but it’s not hard to find.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Rookiemonster

This is definitely not my area of knowledge. But I’ve always been to Nader the impression that 1966 Topps had a lot of SPs. I know the Seaver is a hard to get because of the price but it’s not hard to find.

Actually, Seaver is hard to get. The 1967 High #s appeared on the sheets 2, 3 or 4 times. Seaver is one of the 11 cards that only appeared 2 times. I suspect that the 1966 High Numbers are similar where you have a lot of easy ones, a lot that appear to be hard, but only 11 that are truly short printed.

[Rookiemonster]

Originally Posted by rats60

Actually, Seaver is hard to get. The 1967 High #s appeared on the sheets 2, 3 or 4 times. Seaver is one of the 11 cards that only appeared 2 times. I suspect that the 1966 High Numbers are similar where you have a lot of easy ones, a lot that appear to be hard, but only 11 that are truly short printed.

Thanks for the info ! I never viewed that card as a SP growing up in New Jersey I seen that card for as long as I can remember. This makes me want the card more.

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by Rookiemonster

Thanks for the info ! I never viewed that card as a SP growing up in New Jersey I seen that card for as long as I can remember. This makes me want the card more.

Dustin:

Having grown up in NJ, I understand. The dealers there would display a Seaver RC in a showcase and not put one in an album. That's why you always saw that card compared to some of the others. Plus the higher price point made for less people buying that card for financial reasons.

Rich

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by h2oya311

Hardest 1960s rookies (stretching the boundaries a little):

1967 Cincinnati Reds Team Issue PC - Johnny Bench:


1963 Houston Colt 45s Team Issue - Joe Morgan:


1963-64 UNC-Dominican "Album" card - Phil Niekro:


1965 Baltimore Orioles Team Issue PC - Jim Palmer:


1963 Cincinnati Reds Team Issue PC - Pete Rose:


1969 Topps Test Issue - Bowie Kuhn:


For those that I don't own, I'd love to acquire a 1966 Pro's Pizza of Fergie Jenkins. I saw one years ago at auction and haven't seen another since. I'd also love a 1963 San Diego Team Issue (8"x10") of Tony Perez. Hint, hint!

Great team issue Bench, Derek. That one's been on my want list for quite awhile. Send my a PM if you ever want to sell.

Highest regards,

Larry

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Great team issue Bench, Derek. That one's been on my want list for quite awhile. Send my a PM if you ever want to sell.

Highest regards,

Larry

That Palmer is insane. Any time.
Here are a few I have picked up from Derek.

[h2oya311]

I forgot about Steve Carlton and Tom Seaver for this 1960s "rookie" thread. Nice cards, Peter! The '65 Carlton is pretty difficult. Yours has the hollow "LPIU" label which is why it's dated to '65. The solid "LPIU" labels are from '67-68 and, while the image is the same for Carlton in both issues, the cropping is slightly different. Nice one!

[Chuck9788]

Not sure if it's the "toughest", but Joe Morgans 1965 rookie card is special in that it's the only Hall of Fame rookie card with the "Houston Colt 45's".

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's interesting because the pennant on the Morgan card says "Houston" while other 65 Topps say "Houston Astros." And as far as I recall, all other 65 Topps just have the team nickname and logo but no city.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It's interesting because the pennant on the Morgan card says "Houston" while other 65 Topps say "Houston Astros." And as far as I recall, all other 65 Topps just have the team nickname and logo but no city.

Low series cards have only Houston on the pennant, but players wearing Colt 45 hats. Later series have Houston Astros with either no hats or airbrushed hats and even Astros hats on the 7th series Rookie Star card.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by JTysver

Seaver's rookie is pretty difficult to find and you can't really find a beat up version of it for anywhere less than $200. It may be the hardest to find.

Sorry to ressurect an old thread, but this is a card I've been looking for for some time. $200? I can't find any version of it on eBay that I would be ok with for less than $300. There are usually some out there you can offer on that are of the 3 or 4(MK) variety with some ink on the back or something. I found a 4 like that last week, front was nice but it had back scribble. I offered, but the seller wasn't interested in less than $300.

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by 1963Topps Set

I would of thought the 1967 Topps Seaver would be the toughest. It is a high number in the rough high number series of 1967 Topps and I believe a single print. It always appears here on everyone's want list.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fro...ookie&_sacat=0

111 give or take on ebay right now - wouldn't exactly call that "tough"

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by hcv123

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fro...ookie&_sacat=0

111 give or take on ebay right now - wouldn't exactly call that "tough"

30 of those 111 either have "RP" or "Reprint" in the title. Then there were still several other reprints that didn't have either in the title.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Sorry to ressurect an old thread, but this is a card I've been looking for for some time. $200? I can't find any version of it on eBay that I would be ok with for less than $300. There are usually some out there you can offer on that are of the 3 or 4(MK) variety with some ink on the back or something. I found a 4 like that last week, front was nice but it had back scribble. I offered, but the seller wasn't interested in less than $300.

Deans had a Seaver rookie on Ebay a while back that was torn in half and taped back together, it sold for $180.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Deans had a Seaver rookie on Ebay a while back that was torn in half and taped back together, it sold for $180.

Knowing Dean's - I'm surprised there was not another zero on the end of that figure. Not that it would have sold that way.