Has anyone here tackled the 1952 Topps set?

[Doug]

I know there are a bunch of collectors that over on the prewar side that are working on the T206 set and several that have completed it (with or w/o the big 4) and it got me to wondering how many people over here are working on or have completed the 1952 Topps set. My first project when I got into vintage cards back in '98 was to try and put together the 1952 Topps set, but I only got about halfway before I had to give up due to a combination of running out of funds and struggling to find the high numbers. If anyone has completed the set, it would be great to see some scans of your best cards!

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Doug

I know there are a bunch of collectors that over on the prewar side that are working on the T206 set and several that have completed it (with or w/o the big 4) and it got me to wondering how many people over here are working on or have completed the 1952 Topps set. My first project when I got into vintage cards back in '98 was to try and put together the 1952 Topps set, but I only got about halfway before I had to give up due to a combination of running out of funds and struggling to find the high numbers. If anyone has completed the set, it would be great to see some scans of your best cards!

I'm only doing the Dodgers team set and am left with the high numbers to chase at this point, whcih is scary enough! I can't believe how many Bums are highs in '52 but that's life. I admit the highs seem daunting and if I had to buy a Mantle it would probably be a deal killer but putting a full 407 card settoegtehr would be quite the achievement.

If Topps cards were not numbered, would people ignore the harder to find cards like in T206?

[Doug]

Originally Posted by toppcat

If Topps cards were not numbered, would people ignore the harder to find cards like in T206?

Its kind of similar to the 1933 Goudey set in that they are numbered and there are people that consider their set complete without the Lajoie so there are probably people that consider their 1952 Topps set complete without the Mantle.

[HRBAKER]

The 1952 Topps Mantle is by no way a hard card to find. Tough to pony up for, yes but not hard to find. I am not sure many folks consider a 1952 Topps set complete without #311. Many folks build a 1-310 set without the high numbers but I don't think they would call it complete.

[pwilk17]

I am close to 90% complete in PSA slabs on the Master set. I have a few cards to cross over including a Mantle (which resides in a BVG holder). I am under pwilk17 on the PSA registry. I have a lot of nice PSA 7 low numbers and still need 12 high numbers. (my high numbers are not the greatest - a lot of 3s 4s and 5s). Here are a few of my cards. I am looking for 131-190 gray backs if anyone has any for sale or trade.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

The 1952 Topps Mantle is by no way a hard card to find. Tough to pony up for, yes but not hard to find. I am not sure many folks consider a 1952 Topps set complete without #311. Many folks build a 1-310 set without the high numbers but I don't think they would call it complete.

True, I should have said harder to buy.

[Doug]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

The 1952 Topps Mantle is by no way a hard card to find. Tough to pony up for, yes but not hard to find. I am not sure many folks consider a 1952 Topps set complete without #311. Many folks build a 1-310 set without the high numbers but I don't think they would call it complete.

I don't think a set is complete unless it has all of the cards. That's one thing that turned me off on the T206 set. I might have been able to swing a beater Plank, but I'd never be able to afford a Wagner (unless I hit the Powerball) so I dont really see having a set that's missing one card. Then there's that whole set/master set argument. Is a 1952 Topps set complete at 407 cards or do you need all of the 1-80 red/black backs, the Campos variation, the 131-190 gray/yellow backs and both versions of the double printed Mantle, Robinson, and Thompson cards to call it complete?

[mightyq]

hi doug,
good post, i am currently building this set in psa 7 grade, i have 180 of the first 310...only highs i have are mantle, robinson, campy, . i do not consider the set complete until all the highs are done also. i started about 7 months ago, buying 7's are not hard at all, a select few are, black back etc, but overall doable. i figure the highs will take me 5 times longer than it takes me for the 1-310. thats if i want to get them in 7 grade...i might have to go with 5's and better to stay sane.

[pwilk17]

I have focused on the PSA master set of 490 cards - 1-80 in black and red backs - I do like the low number cards and have enjoyed obtaining one black and one red of each. I would like to complete the super master set including all of the gray backs.

[Doug]

I've considered trying to put together a lower grade G/VG set, but usually anytime I attempt building a set I end up running out of patience, money, or both. I recently picked up a PSA 1.5 Mantle so at least I have it out of the way, but it takes my budget so long to recover from a purchase like that I probably wouldn't be able to pick up any more cards for several months or longer. I mentioned in the latest pickup thread that I've actually owned three other '52 Mantles over the years (a SGC 30, PSA 3, and PSA 4), but anytime an unexpected expense came up the Mantle was always the first thing to go so I never got past one card. Maybe that's a sign I need to pick a cheaper set. I had a friend of mine that got 4 or 5 cards away from having the set finished and he ended up having to sell it. I'd like to give it another shot, but I guess I will wait and see. Good luck to all of you guys that are attempting the postwar "monster"!

[doug.goodman]

I currently need the Feller, Crandall and Campos variations, both Mantles, both Jackies, the Campy, the Mathews and 11 "common" high number cards to have a complete 497 card "master" set.

Most of my set is here -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/douggoo...7612263166235/

Yes, they are all raw. Many of your pop reports are wrong due to my kitchen knives. I would say sorry, but I don't like to lie.

Doug

[Zach Wheat]

I think Ted Z has completed a set before and he was working on the 131-190 grays also. I have most of the set (not Master set) complete except for about 18 high numbered cards. I think once I finish that I will work on the variations. I know the Campos red star black star variation will be difficult - so I don't think a complete master set is a realistic goal.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Zach Wheat

I think Ted Z has completed a set before and he was working on the 131-190 grays also. I have most of the set (not Master set) complete except for about 18 high numbered cards. I think once I finish that I will work on the variations. I know the Campos red star black star variation will be difficult - so I don't think a complete master set is a realistic goal

I have to check-I believe a master set is exactly 500 cards.

[wolfdogg]

I have completed the base set of 407 cards + have both the Sain/Page errors, the Campos black star and 50/80 black-red combos of the low series. Haven't even thought of tackling the Mantle, Robinson, Thomson or the 3 Boone variations.....but I haven't gave up...........did I miss any??

[Doug]

Are there any other "black star" variations besides the Campos? Here's a quote from an old post about the Campos variation:

Posted By: MW

I am told that there is one other black star variation in this series but I have yet to verify it in person. Interestingly, there is yet another Campos variation as well. This second variation I have verified.

Anybody have an idea what the other black star variation is or what this second Campos variation is?

[ALR-bishop]

I collect this set. I have the basic set of 407, plus 1-80 in both red and black back, plus the two black back versions of Sain and Page ( 3 variations in all). Also have the two variation of Mantle, Robinson and Thompson ( stiches on the back, and in the case of Mantle front differences as well) and the 3 variations of Campos ( regular, black star, and missing border).

I gave some thought to trying to do the grey back variations ( Canadians), but gave up in despair. Also have an unopened pack. It has always amazed me how many vitual unkowns are in the set, I assume as a result of the Topps/Bowman contract battles

[Doug]

Do you have a scan of the Campos with the missing border? I've never seen one.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Doug

Do you have a scan of the Campos with the missing border? I've never seen one.

I wasn't aware of the Campos lacking border-it it a print freak or a true variation? Also not aware of a 2nd star variation. Others not mentioned here that I have seen talked or written about (I don't own any) are shown below. Please confirm these as they are from various written sources, not scans.

42 Ketrow (BB) red or peach background.
43 Scarborough (BB) red or peach background
55 Boone (BB) Light Green or Dark Green background
55 Boone (RB) Light Green or Dark Green background
60 Wehmeier (BB) Yellow/Red or Orange/Red background
88 Feller Hazy or Clear background (this one I have seen)

What is in the PSA Super Set of 545 that brings the count so high?

[Doug]

Originally Posted by toppcat

What is in the PSA Super Set of 545 that brings the count so high?

Here's a checklist stating that it's a work in progress as new variations are graded: http://www.psacard.com/SetRegistry/S...on.aspx?c=6796

[ALR-bishop]

Dave...Is not the 545 figure inflated by the Canadians being added to the Registry master set ?

You know me and scans, Dave ( bishop). I can send you a color copy of the 3d Campos and you can post it. It is a print defect as opposed to a true variation, which I equate with an intentional change, like the 59 Spahn or option/trade changes ( but in my view the Herrer and Bakep are just print defects too, and maybe the Campos black star , although Levi disagrees with me on that). I have seen more than one of the Campos missing border cards on ebay, so it is not unique

I think I can send you color copies of some of the other front variations you asked about within the 1 to 80 group too if you want to see them.

[Doug]

Originally Posted by toppcat

I wasn't aware of the Campos lacking border-it it a print freak or a true variation? Also not aware of a 2nd star variation. Others not mentioned here that I have seen talked or written about (I don't own any) are shown below. Please confirm these as they are from various written sources, not scans.

42 Ketrow (BB) red or peach background.
43 Scarborough (BB) red or peach background
55 Boone (BB) Light Green or Dark Green background
55 Boone (RB) Light Green or Dark Green background
60 Wehmeier (BB) Yellow/Red or Orange/Red background
88 Feller Hazy or Clear background (this one I have seen)

What is in the PSA Super Set of 545 that brings the count so high?

The PSA list doesn't even have the six cards listed above or the Mantle, Robinson, and Thomson double prints with the stitching reversed so adding them would bring the total to 554. They also don't list the "Herrer", "Bakep", or Campos (missing border) variations/printing errors that have been mentioned in the last post which would now give us 557 and counting? Also did anyone figure out what the other possible "black star" card is?

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by Doug

The PSA list doesn't even have the six cards listed above or the Mantle, Robinson, and Thomson double prints with the stitching reversed so adding them would bring the total to 554. They also don't list the "Herrer", "Bakep", or Campos (missing border) variations/printing errors that have been mentioned in the last post which would now give us 557 and counting? Also did anyone figure out what the other possible "black star" card is?

Sorry...the Herrer is 58 and Bakep is 57. They were just examples of printing defects treated like a variation. I do have the extra Campos, but it is clearly a print defect, although not an isolated one since I have seen it 3 times now. Not sure about the Mantle, Thompson and Robinson-- print defect or variation ?---and why is the stiching on the ball on the back reversed on those 3 ? There are actually noticeable and documented front differences on the 2 different Mantles, which I have, but I would guess they will never add a second Mantle to the Master set list given the cost involved, and, if not, the Thompson and Robinson will not likely be added either.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by ALR

There are actually noticeable and documented front differences on the 2 different Mantles, which I have, but I would guess they will never add a second Mmantle to the Master set list given the cost involved, and if not, the Thompson and Robinson will not likely be added either.

I wonder if that is why the Super Set designation was given. I'm not a registry guy so that's just a WAG as I don't recall that type of designation before. As for the 545 in that set, I am not really sure Al-there doesn't seem to be master # for each and my take on the 500 card Master set is that it doesn't not have the gray backs, but then the 545 figure seems too low a there a 60 gray backs.

Too bad Dick Gilkeson isn't here!

[Doug]

I'm not a registry guy either so I don't get all of this master set/super set stuff. I would just call cards 1-407 the set and leave it at that. All of these variations/print errors would just be just that IMO as opposed to being part of some kind of invented "super set".

[ALR-bishop]

Doug---I think a lot of people feel just as you do. But, for example, what about the 1962 set in which there are 4 different cards numbered 137: two completely different poses of Reniff ( potrait and pitching) and two variations of a Ruth pose. Admitedly that situation is rare ( although it happens a couple of other times in the same 62 set), but in the 59 set Topps made deliberate changes to about a half dozen cards in latter print runs, and that is true in a number of other sets as well. Even if you exclude print error variations, what do you do about intentional Topps changes ? And then where is line drawn on what is a "variation" and what is a "print defect". It is beyond me. But I do like collectiong proofs, errors and variations anyway

[Doug]

Well if they are intentionally different cards, even with the same number, I would say they should count. I guess it's all a matter of personal opinion. For example, if I were putting together a T206 set I would consider the Demmitt and O'hara St. Louis/New York cards separate because they were intentionally updated to reflect the new teams as opposed to cards like the Magie and Doyle, NY Natl cards that were print errors and later corrected. At least the only real rule about collecting is to collect what you like, so if you like what you are doing, you are all good!

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Doug

Well if they are intentionally different cards, even with the same number, I would say they should count. I guess it's all a matter of personal opinion. For example, if I were putting together a T206 set I would consider the Demmitt and O'hara St. Louis/New York cards separate because they were intentionally updated to reflect the new teams as opposed to cards like the Magie and Doyle, NY Natl cards that were print errors and later corrected. At least the only real rule about collecting is to collect what you like, so if you like what you are doing, you are all good!

There is some anectodal evidence the 62 Green Tints were composed and printed separately, so they would fit the criteria of intentional. I like the idea of uninetnional vs intentional to determine if part of a set!

[Doug]

Originally Posted by toppcat

There is some anecdotal evidence the 62 Green Tints were composed and printed separately, so they would fit the criteria of intentional. I like the idea of unintentional vs intentional to determine if part of a set!

Thanks, I figure if a card was intentionally created it was meant to be part of the set, otherwise it was just a printing error/variation and it was never originally intended to be included. I guess some people just like an even bigger challenge and there's no "wrong" way to collect!

[ALR-bishop]

Only trouble is trying to determine when it is intentional. For example, Levi thinks the Campos black star was a correction of an error and not a print defect. Who knows. I agree with you on the 62 greenies. The pose differences occurred as I understand it when they changed their contracted printer after the poor quality of the run that had the green tints. At least that is what "I heard" . In any event i have all of them too just to be sure

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by toppcat

I wasn't aware of the Campos lacking border-it it a print freak or a true variation? Also not aware of a 2nd star variation. Others not mentioned here that I have seen talked or written about (I don't own any) are shown below. Please confirm these as they are from various written sources, not scans.

42 Ketrow (BB) red or peach background.
43 Scarborough (BB) red or peach background
55 Boone (BB) Light Green or Dark Green background
55 Boone (RB) Light Green or Dark Green background
60 Wehmeier (BB) Yellow/Red or Orange/Red background
88 Feller Hazy or Clear background (this one I have seen)

What is in the PSA Super Set of 545 that brings the count so high?

David---I have these except the Scarborough

[ncinin]

I noticed this card in a collection I picked up awhile back. You can see that part of the top/left border is missing. I kept it in case it became a desirable variation at some point in the future.

[Doug]

Thanks for posting that scan, I had never seen one before. How does it relate to the black star variation in terms of rarity and value?

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by Doug

Thanks for posting that scan, I had never seen one before. How does it relate to the black star variation in terms of rarity and value?

That is what I have. When I got mine on ebay I think I paid over $ 100 for the card, which was in slightly better condition than the one in the scan . The seller listed it as a variation and there were other bidders but the fact it is not listed like the black star makes it less marketable. Because it is a front variation it is easier to spot if it shows up on ebay by accident, but I think it is pretty rare from my experience.

If you do an ebay search now for a 1959 Topps Ramos, you will find a print defect unlisted variation offered for $ 2500 ( it is a PSA 9 ). That card has sold in Ex + conditon for .99 cents recently. If it ever get listed, the value would go up I think . Same with the border defect Campos, but in the case of the Campos I think the value could be significant because of the value taken on by the black star already

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by ALR

That is what I have. When I got mine on ebay I think I paid over $ 100 for the card, which was in slightly better condition than the one in the scan . The seller listed it as a variation and there were other bidders but the fact it is not listed like the black star makes it less marketable. Because it is a front variation it is easier to spot if it shows up on ebay by accident, but I think it is pretty rare from my experience.

If you do an ebay search now for a 1959 Topps Ramos, you will find a print defect unlisted variation offered for $ 2500 ( it is a PSA 9 ). That card has sold in Ex + conditon for .99 cents recently. If it ever get listed, the value would go up I think . Same with the border defect Campos, but in the case of the Campos I think the value could be significant because of the value taken on by the black star already

Is it possible to have a missing border with the black star on back?

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Is it possible to have a missing border with the black star on back?

David...while I am sure anything is possible, I have never seen a slabbed blackstar front with that defect. On the other hand, I have only seen about a half dozen of those blackstars

[tedzan]

I am nearing completion of a "master set". I still need a few of the
extremely rare mid-series (#131-190) cards with the GRAY backs.

A master set comprises of 553 cards..........

1st Series (issued Spring of '52)

#1-80 Black backs with Page and Sain errors (82 cards)
#1-80 Red backs (issued Spring/Summer of '52)

2nd series (issued Spring of '52)

#81-130

3rd series (issued Summer of '52)

#131-190 White backs
#131-190 GRAY backs (unknown issue date)

4th series (issued Summer of '52)

#191-250

5th series (Semi-Hi#s)....(issued Summer/Fall of '52)

#251-310)
Campos variation


6th series (Hi numbers)....(issued Fall of '52)

#311-313 (BB stitching CW on backs)
#311-313 (BB stitching CCW on backs)
#314-407


TED Z

[Exhibitman]

I don't collect the set per se, just the cards in the set that I like. If you are not a condition bug and are patient you can add some of the better cards at very reasonable prices. I picked up a J. Robinson for $100. Low grade but presentable. The common HOFers have been $20 or less in g-vg.

[ALR-bishop]

[QUOTE=tedzan;750005]#1-80 Black backs with Page and Sain errors (82 cards)
#1-80 Red backs (issued Spring/Summer of '52)

Ted---that is amazing on the grey backs. I know they are tough.

Does that number include the 3 versions of the Sain and Page cards-- the red back, and the black backs with both the correct and incorrect bio info, since the latter exists both ways ?

[toppcat]

[QUOTE=ALR;750112]

Originally Posted by tedzan

#1-80 Black backs with Page and Sain errors (82 cards)
#1-80 Red backs (issued Spring/Summer of '52)

Ted---that is amazing on the grey backs. I know they are tough.

Does that number include the 3 versions of the Sain and Page cards-- the red back, and the black backs with both the correct and incorrect bio info, since the latter exists both ways ?

I think if you add up Ted's plus the six I ID up above and the Page/Sain "third" cards and you get 561 in the master set. Good grief!

[GoldenAge50s]

Originally Posted by tedzan
#1-80 Black backs with Page and Sain errors (82 cards)
#1-80 Red backs (issued Spring/Summer of '52)

Am I missing something here?

The above list DOES account for 3 Page-Sain cards, doesn't it?

[pdub1819]

I'm new here, but I thought I would add that on the Collectors Universe Forum, there is a member (Ijustlovecards) who is tackling the 52 set, she actually is having a competition for everyone by giving away a nice Mantle card to whoever comes closest to guessing how much she spends on the set. She already has the '52 Mantle in PSA 7, check out her registry, it is pretty cool to watch her build the set.

[tedzan]

Hey guys,

I'm not quite sure I understand your comments on the Page and Sain errors.

Anyhow, the Page and Sain errors exist ONLY with the Black backs. The first 80 cards were printed and issued in the Spring of 1952
with the Black backs. Then Topps switched to printing the Red backs in their 2nd series (cards #81-130) and, all subsequent series.
Due to the huge popularity of the '52 Topps cards, Topps subsequently went back and ran additional press runs on the first 80 cards.
This time printing them with Red backs and in greater quantities.

I collected these cards as a young teenager and have fond memories of them. Ask me any question regarding the 1952 Topps cards
and I'll try to answer them.

TED Z

[ALR-bishop]

The above list DOES account for 3 Page-Sain cards, doesn't it?[/QUOTE]

Maybe so, that's what I was asking

[tedzan]

ALR

Yes, I guess at first, your "3 versions" of each threw me off.....I need another cup of coffee this morning.

My grand total of 553 cards includes all versions of Page and Sain.


Regards,

TED Z

[tedzan]

I don't do graded cards, so I don't know if the pop reports account for the 60 GRAYback variations in the mid-series (#131-190).

I'm curious if PSA, or SGC, pop reports reflect these extremely rare cards (that I think were actually issued in 1953) ? ?






COLOR variations......

Also, the aforementioned color variations are simply printing errors or printer's variations and I feel that they should not be part of
a "Master Set".
As is obvious when you compare 1st series (1#-80) Black backs vs Red backs, the front colors are somewhat different. The Black
back cards tend to be pale in contrast to the Red backs that are brighter. A trained eye can discern a Black back from a Red back
without flipping the card over.

I have a bunch of these color variations but, I don't include them as part of my master set.


TED Z

[tedzan]

In my prior post I show Cass Michaels card, Although he is identified with the Washington team,
what ballpark was this picture taken in ?


TED Z

[Chris Counts]

Since Cass Michaels came up with the White Sox, my first guess was Comiskey Park. I checked an old postcard, and it's a dead ringer for a match ...

[tedzan]

You got it....it definitely is Comiskey Park in the background.


TED Z

[ALR-bishop]

COLOR variations......

Also, the aforementioned color variations are simply printing errors or printer's variations and I feel that they should not be part of
a "Master Set".
As is obvious when you compare 1st series (1#-80) Black backs vs Red backs, the front colors are somewhat different. The Black
back cards tend to be pale in contrast to the Red backs that are brighter. A trained eye can discern a Black back from a Red back
without flipping the card over.

I have a bunch of these color variations but, I don't include them as part of my master set.


TED Z[/QUOTE]

Ted--I have the first 80 in red and black and realize some of the front color differences are directly related to those different runs. When I asked about that in a CU thread on the 52 set, someone pointed out that there are also front color differences on some cards even with the same backs. I think Boone is one, and I do have at least 3 different color backgrounds for that card.

I am not a registry person, and although I like to collect variations/errors, I have no personal check list for what constitutes a master set. There has been earlier discussion about what is a variation and what is just a print defect. For my own purposes I view a variation as a card that Topps intentionally changed for some reason. But even that distinction is hard to apply sometimes. I think Campos, which I have, is a print defect, others say not. I also think the Herrer and Bakep ( which I also have) are just print defects ( and numerous other cataloged variations as well), but, they are viewed by most as variations. I collect anything listed as a Topps variation in the SCD catalog and also unlisted variations/errors that I think might or ought to qualify....and often send them to SCD ( some have been included)

I realized I was probably over the edge when I went out and got the 2nd Mantle, Thompson and Robinson, just to have those other stitches

[tedzan]

ALR

Yes, I have the 3 Ray Boone cards you are referring to. In the back of my mind is another variation in the 52T set.

I say this because my first intuitive guess of how many cards comprise a Master set are 555. Therefore, with this
additional color variation of the Ray Boone card; and, the....? ? ? ?....the grand total = 555 cards.

Perhaps, some one here will come up with this mystery card, that for the moment has eluded me. I think it may be
a Hi # card.


TED Z