NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-21-2018, 04:59 PM
quitcrab quitcrab is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,533
Default

i have a first series sheet. If I recall Koufax and Catfish Hunter was a DP.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-21-2018, 06:25 PM
BillP BillP is offline
Bill par.sons
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 267
Default

I have seen over the past 30 years or so, at least 3 8 card sheets of 66 highs and at least 1 12 card sheet. If I recall, Jackson, coleman, #544, perry, twins team, tigers team, mclain, cards that I consider the shorter sp's were not among them. I don't consider mccovey or Clarke very short sp's. Never a full one. Not to shift the conversation but, why has topps never come forward with information? Print qtys by series, uncut sheets? surely there must be some archive records somewhere. Even sales volumes by month by year could help people understand why selected years (1965) appear to have lower production numbers.

I collect 66 highs and think that the #591 is artificially high. #598 last card in 6 or better I get the cost. The all these, they are available if you have means. Any card really.

Also, the 66 highs about a third of the time are diamond cut, I dislike that.

Comments welcome.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-21-2018, 07:59 PM
Rich Klein Rich Klein is offline
Rich Klein
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Plano Tx
Posts: 4,519
Default

Bill:

In all honesty I don't think Topps kept that information nor cared about that information back in those days. Sorry but it's up to us to find the information!
__________________
Look for our show listings in the Net 54 Calendar section
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-21-2018, 11:45 PM
G1911 G1911 is offline
Gr.eg McCl.@y
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 6,557
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quitcrab View Post
i have a first series sheet. If I recall Koufax and Catfish Hunter was a DP.
That's awesome! Hunter Sounds right, a 66 Catfish seems to be in every lot of random 60's Topps stuff I buy.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-27-2019, 04:32 PM
jmoran19 jmoran19 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quitcrab View Post
i have a first series sheet. If I recall Koufax and Catfish Hunter was a DP.
As well as Pete Rose and Mickey Mantle on the opposite 132 card series 1 sheet.

In total 4 rows were printed 3 times (132 cards) and 6 rows were printed twice (132 cards) on the 264 card sheet. Equates to 110 unique cards

John

Last edited by jmoran19; 05-27-2019 at 05:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-27-2019, 04:36 PM
jmoran19 jmoran19 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 257
Default

will post all i got. These two partials go together, too lazy to cut and paste them together LOL. The 3 pic. extends the Dick Egan and CHI CHI rows to the right

66high.jpg


66high2.jpg
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 66higher5.jpg (76.7 KB, 1113 views)

Last edited by jmoran19; 05-27-2019 at 04:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-27-2019, 04:38 PM
jmoran19 jmoran19 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 257
Default

These two go together as well

66higher.jpg

66higher2b.jpg

Last edited by jmoran19; 05-27-2019 at 05:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-27-2019, 04:54 PM
jmoran19 jmoran19 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 257
Default

Tony Martinez continuation to the right with alt. configuration of two cards below him. In total the partials show 44 different cards i think. JOhn
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 66higher4.jpg (76.6 KB, 1105 views)

Last edited by jmoran19; 05-27-2019 at 05:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-09-2020, 07:35 AM
Kevvyg1026 Kevvyg1026 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 456
Default

Most current price guides suggest that there are 43 SPs in the high series for 1966. If correct, this means that Topps probably used a print pattern of four rows printed 3x each and three rows printed 4x each for the full print sheet for the 7th series of 1966.

Based on the images shown in this thread, there appear to be seven unique rows of cards, as expected. The rows are as follows:

R1 (headed by Northrup) - 554, 568, 584, 581, 534, 558, 573, 536, 529, 572, 574.

R2 (headed by Mantilla) - 557, 588, 545, 526, 589, 593, 563, 578, 548, 524, 539.

R3 (headed by Shirley/Jackson) - 591, 540, 527, 577, 596, 551, 543, plus three more, not yet identified

R4 (headed by perranowski) - 555, 562, 559, 564

R5(headed by Cards rookies) - 544, 565, 547, 546

R6 (headed by Taylor) - 585, 530, 560, 571

R7 (headed by Salmon) - 594, 535, 575, 580

In addition, there are two other rows that have to be placed in this matrix. These include the McCovey row (550, 538, 579, 537) and the row with Sullivan (597, 592, 549). The McCovey row has to be placed above the 5th card in the Northrup row, so it must be in either R4, R5, R6, or R7 (since we only know 4 cards in those rows).

The location of the checklist is almost guaranteed to be in a row of SPs, and the location of the Sullivan row will probably be in a non-SP row.

If the row numbers are looked at carefully, it is clear that sometimes rows contain cards that are identified as SPs while other cards in the same row are not.

For example, Northrup is listed as a SP (#554), but no other card in that row is identified as such.

Another example: the row containing Shirley (#591) has seven identified SPs but also has card # 527 which is not listed as a SP.

A 3rd example: the row with Mantilla (#557) contains 8 cards that are commonly identified as SPs, but three cards which are not (588, 563, 539). Other examples also show this pattern of having both SP and non-SP cards in the same row, which really shouldn't be the case.

Hopefully, additional uncut or miscut material from this series will surface to help clear up these types of questions as well as identify the location within the printing of the other cards issued (e.g., Perry, Raymond, etc.).
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-09-2020, 08:36 AM
bb66 bb66 is offline
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: SE Tennessee
Posts: 113
Default

Thanks Kevvyg1026. Really enjoying your posts on the 63's and 66's. Not sure what to think about some of these cards that look like they should have been SP's, too.Great work to you and to all on this site!!!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-09-2020, 10:30 PM
G1911 G1911 is offline
Gr.eg McCl.@y
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 6,557
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026 View Post
Most current price guides suggest that there are 43 SPs in the high series for 1966. If correct, this means that Topps probably used a print pattern of four rows printed 3x each and three rows printed 4x each for the full print sheet for the 7th series of 1966.

Based on the images shown in this thread, there appear to be seven unique rows of cards, as expected. The rows are as follows:

R1 (headed by Northrup) - 554, 568, 584, 581, 534, 558, 573, 536, 529, 572, 574.

R2 (headed by Mantilla) - 557, 588, 545, 526, 589, 593, 563, 578, 548, 524, 539.

R3 (headed by Shirley/Jackson) - 591, 540, 527, 577, 596, 551, 543, plus three more, not yet identified

R4 (headed by perranowski) - 555, 562, 559, 564

R5(headed by Cards rookies) - 544, 565, 547, 546

R6 (headed by Taylor) - 585, 530, 560, 571

R7 (headed by Salmon) - 594, 535, 575, 580

In addition, there are two other rows that have to be placed in this matrix. These include the McCovey row (550, 538, 579, 537) and the row with Sullivan (597, 592, 549). The McCovey row has to be placed above the 5th card in the Northrup row, so it must be in either R4, R5, R6, or R7 (since we only know 4 cards in those rows).

The location of the checklist is almost guaranteed to be in a row of SPs, and the location of the Sullivan row will probably be in a non-SP row.

If the row numbers are looked at carefully, it is clear that sometimes rows contain cards that are identified as SPs while other cards in the same row are not.

For example, Northrup is listed as a SP (#554), but no other card in that row is identified as such.

Another example: the row containing Shirley (#591) has seven identified SPs but also has card # 527 which is not listed as a SP.

A 3rd example: the row with Mantilla (#557) contains 8 cards that are commonly identified as SPs, but three cards which are not (588, 563, 539). Other examples also show this pattern of having both SP and non-SP cards in the same row, which really shouldn't be the case.

Hopefully, additional uncut or miscut material from this series will surface to help clear up these types of questions as well as identify the location within the printing of the other cards issued (e.g., Perry, Raymond, etc.).


This about nails it, I think. For the Mantila row, "DP"'s 588, 563 and 539 are the last 3 non-"SP" High Numbers still on my want list (16 cards to finish the set, all highs). Pretty sure now these are actually in one of the rows printed less often. Looks like I was completely wrong on 554 Northrup being an actual SP.


I still wonder where the perception of rarity came from originally. Some cards being printed 4 times and others 3 seems to roughly equate to what I've seen collecting the set; there are noticeable SP's, but they are not THAT much tougher to find. Why does 544 Hoerner carry such a premium? When did people decide Grant Jackson/Shirley was a magic Super SP? I've been collecting 60's Topps since the late 90's and everything periodical and guide I have repeats the accepted claim that some cards are extra SP's, and not in multiple of 11's.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:59 AM
BillP BillP is offline
Bill par.sons
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoran19 View Post
Tony Martinez continuation to the right with alt. configuration of two cards below him. In total the partials show 44 different cards i think. JOhn
Same with this 12 card block. If the Northrup row is above the mantilla row then these 2 8 and 12 card sheets fit, but we know that the northrup row is above the Perranoski row,
So these have to be separate blocks of a sheet.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-01-2020, 12:21 PM
BillP BillP is offline
Bill par.sons
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillP View Post
Same with this 12 card block. If the Northrup row is above the mantilla row then these 2 8 and 12 card sheets fit, but we know that the northrup row is above the Perranoski row,
So these have to be separate blocks of a sheet.
Ok, last post for the afternoon on this (I promise), very interesting stuff though. I think from all the input I believe this is the row sequence:
A - Northrup
B - Taylor
C - Salmon
A - Northrup
D - Perranoski
E - Hoerner
B - Taylor
C - Salmon
A - Northrup
F - Mantilla
g - Jackson/Shirley on the bottom corner and open to damage etc.

This sequence includes the input of the 8 card and 12 card sheets and what we know from the miscuts that have been researched.

Other tidbits: Tigers Team/McFarlane has to be in the Hoerner row, so does Perry. That puts Sadowski and Jackson in the taylor row s well.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-27-2019, 05:00 PM
BillP BillP is offline
Bill par.sons
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoran19 View Post
will post all i got. These two partials go together, too lazy to cut and paste them together LOL. The 3 pic. extends the Dick Egan and CHI CHI rows to the right


Attachment 354645


Attachment 354646
So the Egan row is definitely DP's
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-27-2019, 05:05 PM
BillP BillP is offline
Bill par.sons
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillP View Post
So the Egan row is definitely DP's
this is great stuff. It throws 3 of my 11 off the list.

Maybe 570 mahaffey, 543 craig and 590 skowron are in the 11.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-27-2019, 07:42 PM
mikemb mikemb is offline
Mike Lenart
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Garwood, NJ
Posts: 411
Default

Sorry about the old bad picture but hope it helps.

Mike


[IMG][/IMG]
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-28-2019, 04:35 PM
toppcat's Avatar
toppcat toppcat is offline
Dave.Horn.ish
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,815
Default

I wonder if at the end of the day the 66 and 67 full high number sheets (two half sheets) have the same configurations. I wonder why this was done as well, it would seem to be easier to run off three consecutive 77 card runs across both half sheets and then overprint the remaining 33 cards. Packaging considerations? Seems unlikely but who knows.

And has anyone ever seen 1965 high number sheets? 77 card high series from 1965-67 and yet the 65's seem not nearly as wonky.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-29-2019, 10:07 AM
BillP BillP is offline
Bill par.sons
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemb View Post
Sorry about the old bad picture but hope it helps.

Mike


[IMG][/IMG]
So #591, everybody's major SP is on the same row as mcLain, Howser and Navarro interesting. Either it was replaced on a 2nd sheet with the 7th series checklist or it's just as common as those other 3.

With the red print lines on some copies it seems like it was on a border.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:54 AM
BillP BillP is offline
Bill par.sons
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoran19 View Post
will post all i got. These two partials go together, too lazy to cut and paste them together LOL. The 3 pic. extends the Dick Egan and CHI CHI rows to the right

Attachment 354645


Attachment 354646
This 8 card sheet would imply that olivo (in the mantilla row) is below Egan (in the northrup row), but that again doesnt line up with our sequence of the far left card in the 7 rows. So this sheet must be a clue for the other 4 rows on a possible 11 row sheet. Or else, this 8 card cut came from a separate run of 8 card blocks produced separately.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1985 Topps Baseball Uncut Sheet w/ Puckett RC * 1987 Uncut Sheets in Box mintacular 1980 & Newer Sports Cards B/S/T 2 11-20-2017 01:22 PM
Topps uncut sheets mybestbretts Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) 7 11-26-2014 12:30 PM
1972 Topps uncut partial sheets SAllen2556 Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 7 07-07-2014 11:50 AM
1955 Topps uncut sheets chadeast Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 20 06-22-2012 08:52 AM
1952-60 Uncut Topps Sheets Archive Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 2 01-07-2008 02:46 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:47 AM.


ebay GSB