1952-56 Topps Larger Size Cards

[jingram058]

I have only recently, like in the past few years, become a real fan of the 1952 to 1956 Topps larger size (2 and 5/8" by 3 and 3/4") cards. Frankly, I am learning that these are just beautiful cards, all 5 years. At one time I thought the 1953 cards were hideous. But I stand corrected. One of the things that got me going on 1953 is the ongoing thread on these cards. Not only are these cards great to look at, but the backs of these cards are just loaded with great info. Do any of you folks find these cards becoming among your favorites as well?

[G1911]

Always been my favorite period of Topps. I like art more than photos, so they are the period right up my alley design wise. Topps started to laze it in in many ways for the next several decades after 1956, once they bought out the competition and didn’t have to produce a better product to sell. I like many of those later Topps sets, but they are absolutely a lower effort product than when Topps was fighting in a free market. Lazy photography that seems to have been ‘whatever picture is on top of the stack of options goes on the card’ to cutting the card size, all was not done to make a better quality product as 52-56 were doing.

The 53’s are my favorite, as actual paintings.

[rugbymarine]

Originally Posted by G1911

Always been my favorite period of Topps. I like art more than photos, so they are the period right up my alley design wise. Topps started to laze it in in many ways for the next several decades after 1956, once they bought out the competition and didn’t have to produce a better product to sell. I like many of those later Topps sets, but they are absolutely a lower effort product than when Topps was fighting in a free market. Lazy photography that seems to have been ‘whatever picture is on top of the stack of options goes on the card’ to cutting the card size, all was not done to make a better quality product as 52-56 were doing.

The 53’s are my favorite, as actual paintings.

I think Topps laziest era might have been 55 to 56, when they just used a lot of the same photos over and over from 1954. As for the cards themselves, they're beautiful, and I can look at them all day long!

[Beercan collector]

Yes a great time - I wish they would’ve stuck with the size - how crazy would 1957 look in the larger format - As far as topps laziness , mid 60s rival the mid 50s - i’m sure this has been addressed here before - I’m convinced all of Pete Rose’s cards (1963 through 1968) were photographed within minutes of each other - The quote unquote “ mustache“ Gives it away ��
Eric

[campyfan39]

The golden year for sure. I too wish they would have kept the larger size.
53 and 56 are my all time favorites

[ALR-bishop]

Not among my favorites but I like them and enjoy the contrast with the Bowman issues through 1955

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Other than the '50 and '52 Bowman sets, these cards are practically all that I collect. Love them! The period of '50-'56 captures my imagination.

[wdwfan]

I have recently started or built 1957 58, 61, 62, 73, 74 and 75 sets. I love building sets. I enjoy putting them into pages. That includes all cards from a 1987 Topps common to a 1957 Topps Brooks RC or a 1963 Topps RC. Something about putting sets into notebooks then being able to grab them out of the closet, sit on the couch and flip through them looking at all the cards.

But I just can't get into these larger sets. And I just can't get into the smaller sets (Bowman, Leaf, Ts). I guess for me, you can't put them into a notebook, open it and flip through it without turning It sideways. Just not the same when you're flipping through 8-pocket pages vs. 9-pocket pages.

I have stopped at 1957 for now. I do have a couple of smaller and larger cards, but I'll never do the sets. Just not a fan of them.

[ALR-bishop]

Emlily— you can not just skip 1959. It is not allowed

[wdwfan]

I won't be skipping it. It'll get put together eventually. But unlike many, I don't have a huge card budget. So on a pretty tight budget, I have to pick an expensive set (a 50s set) and work on it alongside an inexpensive set (a 70s set).

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Emlily— you can not just skip 1959. It is not allowed

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by wdwfan

But I just can't get into these larger sets. And I just can't get into the smaller sets (Bowman, Leaf, Ts). I guess for me, you can't put them into a notebook, open it and flip through it without turning It sideways. Just not the same when you're flipping through 8-pocket pages vs. 9-pocket pages.

Get the 1950 Bowman set and get 12 pocket pages. It works perfectly, and you won't regret it.

[ALR-bishop]

Agee that if you like the Bowman sets there are sheets to binder all of them. Same with the Topps bigger cards. And you don’t have to view them sideways, you just turn the binder once before opening