Mickey Mantle more afforable

[Brianruns10]

The only shame is the artistry of the card. The 52 set really hits its stride with the high numbers, which are the most beautiful cards in the whole set, in my opinion. Sadly Mathews isn't one of them, and at times feels almost like an afterthought. If I were picking the order of the cards, I might've ended with the Nuxhall, which is such so crazy colorful and he has that great smile...the Mathews feels anticlimactic, and the coloring is pretty weak...the poor fellow looks like he's blushing or has scarlet fever! Though he does come off better than poor Joe Adcock and his five o'clock shadow.

[darkhorse9]

One thing I can't figure out about Mantle cards is...why is the 1959 card so much more expensive then, say the 1957, 1958 or 1960?

It almost always seems to be booking for as much as $100 more than you would expect considering the prices of the surrounding years. It's a first series card and not hard to find.

Why is it more expensive?

[ALR-bishop]

Not sure why, except it is a great photo. Here is one with rounded corners

[Paul S]

I think Al is on the right track. I have a modicum of 58s but don't think they are especially appealing (except for Henry's October pickup -- a stunner. 60's, I dunno, you rarely see scans of them on the board here. Hence, I really have no idea. have

Al, nice Mantle. Mine has rounded corners too. (No scan available)

[Bestdj777]

I think the 58 is a much more attractive card. Coincidentally, mine also has rounded corners. (Pardon the cellphone pic, I need to figure out how to work my scanner still).

[Brianruns10]

Originally Posted by Paul S

I think Al is on the right track. I have a modicum of 58s but don't think they are especially appealing (except for Henry's October pickup -- a stunner. 60's, I dunno, you rarely see scans of them on the board here. Hence, I really have no idea. have

Al, nice Mantle. Mine has rounded corners too. (No scan available)

I think the key dividing line is 1955 to 1956. A lot can be said for the competition between Bowman and Topps. Topps was always responding and trying to up their game, and each set from 1952 through 1955 is different and has it's high level of appeal.

Some will surely disagree, but I think the wheels start to fall off in 1956. Bowman was knocked out and Topps had a monopoly. They lost the incentive to top themselves, because what else where the kids gonna buy?

The 56 set is for me a carbon copy of the 55. Same portraits, different background. It's still a very appealing set, no doubt, and one I'd like to start soon, but I do think it was a bad sign that the 56 would mirror the 55 so much...heck, my Dad even has trouble telling them apart sometimes, unless he has one of each side by side.

The 57 set is certainly a different approach, and gets points because it is the first truly modern set, in the modern size. I personally dislike that they shrunk the size, after so many years of proudly touting their "Giant Size" cards. And for no reason other than they could cram more cards onto a sheet.

After 57, each set is diminishing returns, in my opinion. The number of cards in a set grows, and the artistry goes downhill. My dad's collection stops at 1963 when he quit collecting, and I've no desire to extend it any further.

Looking back, I think the worst thing that could've happened to Topps was beating their rival Bowman. They really needed each other, to keep up that competitive drive, and the need to ensure ever higher quality to earn the nickels and dimes of kids all over the country.

[ALR-bishop]

I have a Topps set run, 1948 and 1951 through 2013, By the time I started collecting in 1957,Bowman had sold out to Topps ( and did so at it's absolute market high, a great deal for Bowman),

I agree with you on the lack of progress in 56 but feel Topps did a great job on it's product from 57 until at least 72 (some years better than others for sure). The 67 set in particular was well done. Also if you were a Topps collector in the 60s and early 70s there were some great insert and test issue sets to collect with the regular sets. The Topps 1968 3D set is magnificent, and there are many others.

Also, while I continue to buy new Topps sets to keep the run going, I also collect the Topps Heritage sets which duplicate the style of their older sets, so far 1952 through 1963 ( 2001-2012)

By the way, the above Mantle is a porcelain by RJN China