Perceived or Real? rarity of 1967 B Robby, 1970 Bench

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim

Hello, longtime (years) lurker, first time poster. Thanks Ted for all your great research-oriented threads. I don't own a single t206 but I voraciously read anything you post on them.

I have a question, or possible point of research, myself.

When I was a kid in the 70s building sets, I remember it was always stated that the 67 B. Robinson, 1970 Bench, and 72 carew were quite rare cards and were very very difficult to find, thus the high price (for that time - I think the bench was listed at $25 in 1980, which was the highest value card for that era at the time. ) I guess I always believed this, but recently I think I read somewhere that it was really an urban legend or a myth (my words) and that those particular cards were no more difficult than other hi# cards from the same series. I have heard mention of a rumor about a collector hording them to drive the price up.

I believe that current ebay prices for them bear this out - they are not too much more expensive today than they were in 1986 for a raw ex,ex-mt card. Obviously, with grading these days, the higher grades provide a more quantifiable idea of rarity. But I am referring more to the general rarity of the card itself, not the conditional rarity.

I'd appreciate thoughts from the group - as your collective and individual experience is far superior.

thx, jim

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The 1967 Brook Robinson is a short printed card in the high number series...but I don't think the Bench or Carew are too tough. They may have just been very popular at that time.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

I don't know about the Carew.

But both the Bench and B. Robinson are high-numbers that are hard to find in nice condition.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: CN

The 1972 Carew is also in the rare high number series. CN

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul S

I pulled this out of a pack, way back when. Peter is sort of correct about finding it in really nice condition. In this case, it's not wear, but an obnoxious diamond cut.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rich Klein

But the 1967 Carew was in the late 1970's, a very easy card to find at shows. They were easy at very low prices.

The 1970 Bench Card is tougher because of the warehouse damage these cards suffered by Richard Gelman's Card Collectors Company

The 1972 Topps Carew is for some reason a much harder card than the In Action card from the same set. There are some very tough 1972 Topps Hi#s when there should not be if the sheets were produced correctly.

Rich

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

I have put together two 1967 Topps sets, and I never found this BRobby to be as tough as others have said.
And, I have helped other collectors finish their 67T sets......and, most have never found BRobby to be tough.

Wantlist after wantlist of 67T's have recurring cards....Colavito, Piersall, Red Sox team, Shannon, etc.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

From personal experience, I can tell you that in 1970, at least, the Bench card was very tough. That was the first year I went nuts over baseball cards. I was nine at the time. Whenever I got a dime, I bought a pack of cards. In Southern California, the first four series were widely available and pretty evenly distributed and I got them all fairly easily. I never saw series 4,5 and 6 in California. In August, I went back to Michigan to visit relatives. When I arrived, the 5th series was everywhere, and I soon had most of the cards. Then, just before we left for California in September, the 6th series came out and I bought a bunch of them. Getting the Mays card was one of my season highlights! The 1970 Topps Super set was available in Michigan at this time as well ...

When I returned to California, we were still stuck on the 4th series, so I gave up and started buying football cards. I never did, however, forget that I didn't have Bench, who just happened to be the most popular player on the planet that season (he won the NL MVP) ... then one day in December, I came across a vending machine in a grocery store, and there in the display was Bench. My brother and I just went nuts. We begged all my mom's change, and soon we had emptied that vending machine and I had my Bench ...

As for the Robinson, I've alway been skepitcal about the scarcity of any card I see a lot of in nice shape. And I remember someone showing me a stack of sharp-corned '67 Robinsons back in the mid or late 70s. I've always figured that many so-called rare "modern" cards were simply not well-distributed. I also remeber seeing a bunch of sharp-corned '58 Bell Brands, but the fact that you almost never see them might disprove my theory ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Parker

Rich, can you elaborate on Rich Gelman's warehouse? I have never heard of this but it might be the foundation for the rumors I have heard regarding hording.

I understand that these three cards were hi# cards, but I don't think that alone explains the high prices they were getting for them. My contention is that the prices were artificially high during the 70s and 80s, and that the cards were not as tough as they were portrayed to be. I contend that today's market is a much more accurate reflection of their relative scarcity - there is no great scarcity of these cards - at least not moreso than other high series cards.

From another collector i have communicated with: Consider that in 1990, the 1971 Steve Garvey was listed around $80.00, the second highest price card in the set behind the Ryan ($90.00). The 1972 Carew is $70.00, the second highest price card in the set behind the Fisk/Cooper RC ($100.00). The 1970 Johnny Bench $150.00 the second highest price card in the set behind the Ryan ($300.00). The 1967 Brooks Robinson is $200.00, tied for 3rd (with Mantle), behind the Carew rookie ($400.00) and Seaver rookie ($1250.00).

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Jim,

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say in your last paragraph. I assume that you believe that the '67 B Robby and the '70 Bench are overpriced.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul S

My experience in California was different than Chris's in regard to '70 Topps. I had no problem buying hi series that year. But that was the exception, not the rule, as any previous year I was always hard pressed to find the higher series. This was in the San Fernando Valley. Chris, where were you located?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

PETER

I have no opinion on the 70T Bench....to new for me.

But, I will tell you about the 67T B Robby. Back in the very early 1980's when BB card price guides were new,
certain post-war cards were targeted as being very tough to find. B Robby was one of them. But, to anyone
who collected 67T's and was very familiar with this set, B Robby was not really a tough Hi# as Bunning, Col-
avito, Norm Cash, Piersall, Shannon, Red Sox team card, and about 1/2 dozen other Hi#s. Back then most in
the hobby (unlike the present) were really into building sets. And, every 67T wantlist I saw would invariably
need these same Hi#s; but, seldom B Robby. Every dealer you went to would have one, two, or more BRobby
cards. Yet, the price on this card never really came down to reflect it's availability.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Chris, my experience was just a little different than yours. I bought my first baseball packs the first week of August, 1970. I remember because summer school ended the week before, the last week in July. The packs were definitely 4th series- I got Felipe Alou, all stars of Brooks, Carew, Powell, and Reggie, Dodgers and Phillies Team cards, Mauch, O'Donoghue, and I"m sure a few others I can't recall. I bought them until school started up, and never got 5th series cards at all.
The next year I bought thru the 3rd series until school ended and we went out of the country for the summer. My dad bought me a box while I was gone, it was 5th series. We came back right after labor day and cards were completely gone- they had already started stocking football. I did find some of the last series on an ice cream truck a year later, so they did make it out this far (Santa Monica) but not on a widespread basis.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

I grew up in Orange County. I must confess I didn't travel too far from home, being nine. But I bet I hit up every liquor and grocery store within a couple miles of where I lived. That was back in the days when, as a kid, you could roam the streets in the summer until the sun went down and parents didn't worry about you. Boy, the times have changed ...

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Ted,

I really can't explain the high price that the '67 BRobby high no. continues to be valued at. Brooks didn't have an especially good year, the Orioles weren't in the World Series, I've found nothing special so far.

All I can think of is that we are underestimating the popularity of the best-fielding third baseman of all-time.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

However, the Orioles did win the World Series in 1966 in 4 games over the Dodgers. Brooks didn't have a particularily good series but still there may have been more demand for '67 Topps B. Robby cards than normal.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

This is my night of agreeing with Ted.....There was a find of a hoard of 67 nosebleeds in the early 80's (may have been late 70's) and Brooks was noted to be in short supply at the time. Further amplification of this was cause by the Beckett hi # uncut sheet which showed Brooks in a row of Single Printed cards. However, it appears there would be 2 hi # sheet configurations and on one Brooks is a Double Print. I think all cards in the 67 hi numbers are either printed 2, 3 or 4 times over two 132 card sheets (or one 264 card press sheet which is really how they were produced) but it has also been posited that the array could be 3x and 4x. I think Brooks appears 3 times over the two sheets.

This was discussed previously on this board, although in a different context:

http://tinyurl.com/28bv67

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Parker

Ted,

Thank you for weighing in. Thanks to your extensive experience you have had first hand info regarding the relative availability of this card. You have confirmed my original point that for some reason the 67 BRobby was overvalued, since it appears it was really no more rare than any other 67 "nosebleeds" (I love that term). Of course the demand side of the equation could have helped, but it doesn't seem likely to have been the sole factor.

I think the point about the beckett sheet and perhaps the misperception it was single printed relative to other 67 hi's. I assume he was the only star who was in the perceived SP category so maybe that is why beckett priced it so highly.

Ted or other old-timers, do you have pre-beckett memories of this card having a premium value, or was that purely an outcome of beckett? somewhere i have an old price guide from ~1976 (predates beckett #1 by a few years), I'll have to dig it out.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

I recall going to card shows in the late 70s and the '67 Brooks Robinson was highly sought-after, much more so than the hi-numbered rookies, Seaver and Carew ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Ricky Y

Based on my childhood memories...I recall the 72 Carew was tough for me simply because our neighborhood stores didn't carry the last two series. I didn't know they even existed until I visited a friend who had moved to another town and we were comparing our 72 cards. He had Bonds, Carew, Garvey etc..and I was blown away. It was weird because I was able to find 71 high number cards in my town the previous year. I was eventually able to complete my set by buying them from Stan Martucci in Long Island some years later.

Ricky Y

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

You are on to something....I just looked at my 1979 Sport Americana Price Guide (by Beckett & Eckes)....and the Carew and Seaver Rookies
are listed for about $5 each. The Brooks Robby is listed for $50.

Before this publication this card was not considered that valuable. This was an interesting period (1979-81) in this hobby, as a select number
of post-war cards were hyped.....i.e., 67T BRobby.....52T Mantle.....63T Rose....etc.; these cards started coming out of the "woodwork".
And, of course the Rose rookie was counterfeited. It was a very exciting time to be in the BB card hobby.

But, as the availability of these hyped cards greatly increased, their book value never came down ? ?

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Is the 1970 Bench also a hyped card?

Ted, I agree that the '52 T Mantle, '63 T Rose, and '67 T B. Robby were hyped cards. But as a consequence of the hype, it seems like demand was increased and that has helped to keep the prices going up. Totally amazing...but dangerous.

Look at what happened to the '82 TTraded C. Ripken, that was at $200 for a long time because of hype, now it's dropped to $150.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Peter C said: Is the 1970 Bench also a hyped card?

It must be hyped if I pulled it from a pack, because I had no trouble pulling the best players from the high series that year. My guess is that if someone was fortunate enough to be have a store in their neighborhood that carried the high series, then getting those kinds of players, i.e., Bench, was not going to be terribly difficult.

[Archive]

Posted By: Larry P.

Comments deleted due to irrelevance.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

Sounds like there is a story concerning the Card Collectors Co and the 70 Bench? Gelman and son and their warehouse seem to figure in a lot of Topps mysteries, don't they?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Parker

Dave...good idea on the Gelman thread.

I hope others are equally happy with all the great comments and recollections posted thus far.

Larry, I think the demand side would only account for an initial spike, much like the Bench in 1970. As a kid in the mid 70s (born in 68) I can say that Brooks Robinson had little if any popularity amongst my peers (in the Midwest). I think surely by the late 70s (time of beckett #1), prices would have corrected in the marketplace, unless somehow artificially inflated. Like Ted, said, it shouldn't have been listed as high as it was based on his true market experience with the supply, and perhaps the demand of the card.

I can say that in the late 70s Johnny Bench was still as popular as ever, so I could see a purely demand phenomenon relating to his 1970 card.

I think the psa results are not particularly relevant to this discussion - ANY HOF hi series star in psa 9/10 will go for big bucks, especially if pop report is very low.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rich Klein

That all these years later we are baseball archeologists, trying to ferret out the past while many of the people around are still living.

Rich

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

I get the distinct feeling Richard Gelman does not like talking about his hobby past. A number of dealers I have met over the years are like that. There's a handful of them that could solve 2/3 of the big hobby mysteries but won't talk for one reason or another.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

1970 was my first big year collecting as a kid, after dabbling in 1969. The Bench AS and regular card were, along with the Seaver and Aaron cards the most sought after of all in the set in my neighborhood that year. Bench was definitely a big name in 1970.

Love the 70-72 sets, the big three of my childhood. I had so many 1970's it wasn;t even funny. I remember buying rak paks with Seavers on the top-wish I had a few now....

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

dave why do you think these old-timers won't talk about the past of the hobby???

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

I think a majority of old time dealers were always in the habit of not talking much; sort of a business-protecting poker face. Not saying it's wrong, as it's a a strategic decision but it bugs me that a lot of questions could be answered if a few of them opened up. Maybe a series of posthumous diaries will emerge.....(uh, not)

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

i see, kind of like not filtering too much info out to the general public so people would not realize the rarity of cards they would sell. fritsch advertising to buy all the t206 doyles in trade mags.

[Archive]

Posted By: Darren

The internet has opened up much of our hobby past to the general public. As a kid collecting in the 70's I relied on the major dealers to keep me informed on hobby scarcities, hot products, etc. Now-a-days this type of information is at our fingertips.

Furthermore, we have more accurate pricing as we can see completed auctions and sales pricing of major dealers. What may have been rare or scarce in southern louisiana in the mid-70's (e.g. 1961 topps high numbers) is now readily available.