1952 Topps Baseball Forum

I am not a baseball guy...but I am a vintage Topps collector and ran across the '52 Topps Baseball set while doing a little work on a vintage Topps list.

I think the TCDB set could use a little updating. The VAR numbering is still in the old format and I think there are some significant VARs missing from the checklist. (#131-#190 Gray/White Backs for instance).

I am not an expert on baseball (and don't won't to be), but since this is such an iconic set I thought someone with a passion for vintage baseball might want to bring this set up to current TCDB standards.

To follow the hobby standards, shouldn't the cards #131-190 Gray backs be listed as a Related Set as "1952 Topps Canadian"?  Belief in the hobby is that these were printed in Canada and therefore the VAR.

Are they Canadian? (I don't know, but it's a fascinating question). Too add a little bit more background to the canadian debate...here's a link to a discussion on Net54

"I think there is some consensus among advanced collectors of both sets that the 1952 Topps gray backs were NOT issued in Canada, but the 1954 Topps gray backs WERE issued in Canada."

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=252431&highlight=1952+topps+baseball

And Bob Lemke has a pretty detailed article on his blog.

http://boblemke.blogspot.com/2011/05/1952-topps-not-canadian.html

I'm kicking myself for digressing into baseball, but I am fascinated by "origin" theories for vintage sets.

sandyrusty wrote:

To follow the hobby standards, shouldn't the cards #131-190 Gray backs be listed as a Related Set as "1952 Topps Canadian"?  Belief in the hobby is that these were printed in Canada and therefore the VAR.

Supposedly it is just like the 1954 VAR where the first 50 cards are different paper stock.

It was correct at one time.  A certain member decided that only one card can have a VAR and removed the VARs from the first card of each VAR.  And when he did that all the subcard numbers "a" automaticallly disappeared, but the "b"s remained.  This is not the only set they've done this to.

cnangle wrote:

I am not a baseball guy...but I am a vintage Topps collector and ran across the '52 Topps Baseball set while doing a little work on a vintage Topps list.

I think the TCDB set could use a little updating. The VAR numbering is still in the old format and I think there are some significant VARs missing from the checklist. (#131-#190 Gray/White Backs for instance).

I am not an expert on baseball (and don't won't to be), but since this is such an iconic set I thought someone with a passion for vintage baseball might want to bring this set up to current TCDB standards.

Are they intentionally ignoring the standards or ignorant of them?

Bad form if it's intentional. 

Black Star vs Red Star Variations for '52 Topps #307 Frank Campos. Recognized by PSA as a variation. Should we add it to TCDB?

From the SCD "1952 Topps No. 307: Frank Campos is found with two red stars on the back or with one red and one black star (printed over the red)."