1952-1956 best value topps sets?

[rsdill2]

'52 is undeniably a classic set and will always have it's following for numerous reasons.

52-56 are the original larger "vintage" size. Lots of collectors tend to separate 52-56 from 57-72 (or 73 depending on your opinion) as the two main eras of vintage cards. I stop at 72 (or 73 depending on your perspective) because that's when Topps stopped issuing cards in series.

This is somewhat related, and I realize Beckett prices are mostly useless but I once did an analysis on the sum of individual card values in a set relative to the list value of a complete set. You can see that thread here: http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=183323

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by rsdill2

'52 is undeniably a classic set and will always have it's following for numerous reasons.

52-56 are the original larger "vintage" size. Lots of collectors tend to separate 52-56 from 57-72 (or 73 depending on your opinion) as the two main eras of vintage cards. I stop at 72 (or 73 depending on your perspective) because that's when Topps stopped issuing cards in series.

This is somewhat related, and I realize Beckett prices are mostly useless but I once did an analysis on the sum of individual card values in a set relative to the list value of a complete set. You can see that thread here: http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=183323

Interesting observations in your old thread. Part of the reason '72 set prices are so low relative to the cumulative value of the individual prices of cards in the set is that the set is so big. It was one of the larger sets at 787 cards.

[1952boyntoncollector]

good points.i think it was the issue of the card size is why 52-56 was in my mind.