Collecting 1953 and 1955 Topps

[jasonc]

It's nice to collect the whole set of some of the early to mid 50's sets, but there are missing star cards. Is there anybody else that thinks If I was to collect 1953 and 1955 topps, I would get some great looking cards (Probably two of the best looking sets) and excellent player selection. I know most people would say just go for 1956, but I've done that one already and want to try for a different set/sets.

I noticed the key missing star cards from 1955: Feller, Reese, Mantle, Campanella, Ford are all in 1953.

You get a second year, Aaron, Kaline and Banks; plus, Clemente, Killebrew and Koufax rookies from 1955.

[rats60]

There are missing stars from 1956 Topps too. There is no Stan Musial card. The 1958 Topps set is the closest to what we would consider complete, but players like Jackie Robinson had retired by then. I would go ahead and collect the 1955 Topps set. It has 3 great rookies and 3 great 2nd year cards. Plus it has the best design in my opinion. The design was so good that they copied it again in 1956. The hobby continues to put emphasis on rookie cards and the 1953 Topps set has none, just the iconic Mantle card.

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by rats60

There are missing stars from 1956 Topps too. There is no Stan Musial card. The 1958 Topps set is the closest to what we would consider complete, but players like Jackie Robinson had retired by then. I would go ahead and collect the 1955 Topps set. It has 3 great rookies and 3 great 2nd year cards. Plus it has the best design in my opinion. The design was so good that they copied it again in 1956. The hobby continues to put emphasis on rookie cards and the 1953 Topps set has none, just the iconic Mantle card.

What he said. 1955 is AWESOME!

[ALR-bishop]

I like all 3 of the sets you mention, but since you did 56, the 53 verticle format might be a change of pace

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I love all three sets and want them all eventually in mid grade. Currently, I have 1953, and it is my favorite! I am close to having 1954 finished, with 1955 and 1956 up next.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[sickmantz]

Originally Posted by jasonc

It's nice to collect the whole set of some of the early to mid 50's sets, but there are missing star cards. Is there anybody else that thinks If I was to collect 1953 and 1955 topps, I would get some great looking cards (Probably two of the best looking sets) and excellent player selection. I know most people would say just go for 1956, but I've done that one already and want to try for a different set/sets.

I noticed the key missing star cards from 1955: Feller, Reese, Mantle, Campanella, Ford are all in 1953.

You get a second year, Aaron, Kaline and Banks; plus, Clemente, Killebrew and Koufax rookies from 1955.

Isn't '55 too similar to '56 if you're trying to do something different?

[jasonc]

Originally Posted by sickmantz

Isn't '55 too similar to '56 if you're trying to do something different?

Heh.. That's a good point. Actually, I do not have the 1956 anymore, if I did then that is something I would consider and maybe do 1953 and 1954.

Robert, good point, it is certainly a nice contrast to have 1953, 1954 and 1955 sets, you get iconic players, rookies, and different card styles on those 3 sets.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Jason, '53 and '54 are sweet! I wouldn't mind building '55 and '56, too. They're all awesome! You just can't go wrong.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[kailes2872]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

Jason, '53 and '54 are sweet! I wouldn't mind building '55 and '56, too. They're all awesome! You just can't go wrong.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

No doubt - I love all four sets! It just goes to show how great the product can be when competition is fierce.