Ranking high # series by degree of difficulty (and why?)

[rats60]

The 1963 6th series is much tougher than the 1962 high numbers. I was able to complete the 1962 set collecting in the late 60s, early 70s. My 1963 set wasn't completed until the 80s. My rank would be

1952
1953
1961
1963 6th series
1967
1966
1962
1955.

I posted this before, but my recollection was that some years the final series wasn't released until later in the year. I remember being able to buy 6th and 7th series cards in August 1969, but the next year I was buying 4th series in August and still waiting for the 7th series in September.

[BillP]

My 2 cents as a 60's collector:

61 - selected cards are tougher in high grade. All stars tougher by player Grade 8 of 10 for toughness (10 being highest)

62 - similar with SP cards in high condition tougher. Grade 8 of 10 due to condition of the wood design

63 - 6th series tougher than 7th and still waiting on which 6th series cards are SP's v others as lately this is driving price. Long, #496, Killebrew, Roseboro, Hook, Tresh come mind as candidates. 6th series: 7 7th series 5.

64 - weren't really difficult for me, no SP's per se. So Grade 4.

65 - never have been tough even though SP's exist. Grade 3.

66 - selected cards very tough in centering and high grade, discussed on this forum often. Other high cards very easy to obtain. Tough highs 8, easy highs 3.

67 - same as 66 but higher profile cards makes prices/demand an issue. Even more than 66 easy cards 11-22 of them are readily out there for the same as semi high 6th series. Tough highs (11 cards - produced 2x v 3x or 4x) Grade 9. Easy highs 2

68 - not tough grade 3

69 - 4th series grade 4 highs 2-3.

Comments welcome, billp

[1963Topps Set]

Why is 1960 Topps omitted?

[kailes2872]

My mistake. I tried to do all by memory. I would probably put in the middle bucket around ‘59

[toppcat]

A poll on toughest non-high series would be interesting.

[BillP]

Originally Posted by 1963Topps Set

Why is 1960 Topps omitted?

Sorry, I don't collect 1960 so I can't comment.

[Rich Klein]

IMHO 1960 hi #'s are similar to 59 Hi's in toughness.

[Orioles1954]

As an auction house writer I've been through countless numbers of each set. I think the OPs list is pretty accurate. I would switch 61 and 67 though.

[cesarcap]

Question to Orioles1954: would you rank 66's harder/ higher than 67s? I think people of course don't collect 66's as much (and maybe don't drag along to card shows) so that might have something to do with it.

[avalanche2006]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

IMHO 1960 hi #'s are similar to 59 Hi's in toughness.

So how tough are they?
I'm doing both sets and didn't see any posts on those years.

[Rich Klein]

A few cards are expensive because they are rookies : 59 Bob Gibson or because they are Mantle/Mays/Aaron All Stars, etc. But nothing really to compare with the 62/66/67 short prints or the 61's general toughness


Rich