1991 Topps variations

[jacksoncoupage]

Originally Posted by steve B

Acker is very likely a registration issue.
On one the black is printed fairly far up. You can see this on the top of the Topps logo.

Agreed.

[Pat R]

An few A*B* variations that the op mentioned.

91 Topps A-B sheet code - Copy.jpg

[saucywombat]

Nice.

The AB cards are very tough.

[judsonhamlin]

They are very tough. I haven’t seen a legit eBay/COMC listing for one in quite a while

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by saucywombat

Nice.

The AB cards are very tough.

Originally Posted by judsonhamlin

They are very tough. I haven’t seen a legit eBay/COMC listing for one in quite a while

Yeah they are really hard to locate, I'm trying to get as many of the 62 as I can.

Here are a few more

91 Topps A-B sheet code 2 - Copy.jpg

[jacksoncoupage]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Yeah they are really hard to locate, I'm trying to get as many of the 62 as I can.

Here are a few more

Shouldn't there be 132 (minus the manager cards) since they parallel the A* sheet, which is 132 cards?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage

Shouldn't there be 132 (minus the manager cards) since they parallel the A* sheet, which is 132 cards?

No because just like the player/manager cards that were mixed up from the C-D sheets it was only one half of the A sheet that had the A*B* cards.

[IMG][/IMG]

[jacksoncoupage]

[QUOTE=Pat R;2419573]No because just like the player/manager cards that were mixed up from the C-D sheets it was only one half of the A sheet that had the A*B* cards.



Pat, Im confused, are you saying that A*B* cards were printed on sheets with 50% A* cards? I cant see the photo clearly so forgive me if that is what you are showing here, this doesn't look like a bold 40th sheet which is what those cards were printed on.

Do you have a photo of an uncut sheet with A*B* cards?

[Pat R]

[QUOTE=jacksoncoupage;2419647]

Originally Posted by Pat R

No because just like the player/manager cards that were mixed up from the C-D sheets it was only one half of the A sheet that had the A*B* cards.



Pat, Im confused, are you saying that A*B* cards were printed on sheets with 50% A* cards? I cant see the photo clearly so forgive me if that is what you are showing here, this doesn't look like a bold 40th sheet which is what those cards were printed on.

Do you have a photo of an uncut sheet with A*B* cards?

Hi Dylan, are you saying that you think the layout for the bold 40th sheet and the A*B* sheet were different than this A sheet? These should be better images of the front and back.
All of the confirmed A*B* subjects are on the top half of the sheet.

[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]

[sthoemke]

Originally Posted by judsonhamlin

They are very tough. I haven’t seen a legit eBay/COMC listing for one in quite a while

I sent a bunch to COMC years ago. Sold most for $5 each.

I have one left on COMC of Joe Carter, which no one seems to want to buy

https://www.comc.com/Users/sthoemke/...Back)/13118958

[sthoemke]

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage

Shouldn't there be 132 (minus the manager cards) since they parallel the A* sheet, which is 132 cards?

Don't forget that the factory set has one A* B* card (for some strange unknown reason)

[sthoemke]

Originally Posted by sthoemke

I sent a bunch to COMC years ago. Sold most for $5 each.

I have one left on COMC of Joe Carter, which no one seems to want to buy

https://www.comc.com/Users/sthoemke/...Back)/13118958

FYI, someone just bought the A* B* Joe Carter card...

[jacksoncoupage]

[QUOTE=Pat R;2419667]

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage

Hi Dylan, are you saying that you think the layout for the bold 40th sheet and the A*B* sheet were different than this A sheet? These should be better images of the front and back.
All of the confirmed A*B* subjects are on the top half of the sheet.

No, the layout would be the same for a Bold 40th logo A* sheet.

The A*B* cards are all printed with bold 40th logo.

What I am trying to understand is if/why Topps would produce an A* sheet that is 50% A* and 50% A*B* cards. It seems to reason that the A*B* variation would affect all 132 cards on the sheet.

What this means is:

1. We need to see a photo of an A*B* uncut sheet
2. We need to confirm if the "other" 66 players can be found in the A*B* version

Originally Posted by sthoemke

Don't forget that the factory set has one A* B* card (for some strange unknown reason)

Are you referring to Daryl Boston's card or is there a different one per factory set? Boston is the only player who can be found regularly with A*B* and a non-bold 40th logo on back.

[Pat R]

[QUOTE=jacksoncoupage;2419814][QUOTE=Pat R;2419667]

No, the layout would be the same for a Bold 40th logo A* sheet.

The A*B* cards are all printed with bold 40th logo.

What I am trying to understand is if/why Topps would produce an A* sheet that is 50% A* and 50% A*B* cards. It seems to reason that the A*B* variation would affect all 132 cards on the sheet.

What this means is:

1. We need to see a photo of an A*B* uncut sheet
2. We need to confirm if the "other" 66 players can be found in the A*B* version

Admittedly I have no idea how Topps printed the sheets but some of the variations do give us some indication of how they might have been printed.

I don't know why they would have only printed the A*B* code on half the sheet but I do think that's what they did. I know they are scarce but I think it's beyond coincidence that all of the cards on the top half of the sheet minus the managers are confirmed with an A*B* sheet code and none of the cards on the bottom half have been confirmed with an A*B* code plus you have the same thing with the reversed backs on the C-D sheet that only affected the bottom of those two sheets.

As far as the layouts I think it stayed the same for most if not all of the printing of the sheets for the base cards.

After I found the Bob Melvin RPD I also found a Donnie Hill with the same RPD. They are both found with bold and non bold logos and are in the same location on their sheets with Hill on the 5th card up on the right edge of the A sheet and Melvin in the same location on the B sheet.

91 Topps Melvin-Hill.jpg
91 Topps Melvin-Hill location.jpg

[jacksoncoupage]

[QUOTE=Pat R;2419828][QUOTE=jacksoncoupage;2419814]

Originally Posted by Pat R

No, the layout would be the same for a Bold 40th logo A* sheet.

The A*B* cards are all printed with bold 40th logo.

What I am trying to understand is if/why Topps would produce an A* sheet that is 50% A* and 50% A*B* cards. It seems to reason that the A*B* variation would affect all 132 cards on the sheet.

What this means is:

1. We need to see a photo of an A*B* uncut sheet
2. We need to confirm if the "other" 66 players can be found in the A*B* version

Admittedly I have no idea how Topps printed the sheets but some of the variations do give us some indication of how they might have been printed.

I don't know why they would have only printed the A*B* code on half the sheet but I do think that's what they did. I know they are scarce but I think it's beyond coincidence that all of the cards on the top half of the sheet minus the managers are confirmed with an A*B* sheet code and none of the cards on the bottom half have been confirmed with an A*B* code plus you have the same thing with the reversed backs on the C-D sheet that only affected the bottom of those two sheets.

As far as the layouts I think it stayed the same for most if not all of the printing of the sheets for the base cards.

After I found the Bob Melvin RPD I also found a Donnie Hill with the same RPD. They are both found with bold and non bold logos and are in the same location on their sheets with Hill on the 5th card up on the right edge of the A sheet and Melvin in the same location on the B sheet.

Attachment 614364
Attachment 614365

I agree that layouts didn't change.

It seems like you are onto something with A*B* cards. Its just so bizarre to me that only 1/2 the sheet would get it but I understand why you think so, it sure is looking that way. I wish I had kept better track of the A*B* cards as they turned up, I had just assumed this entire time that all A* cards got the A*B* treatment at some point in the production run.

This means that I'll have to take another look at my bold logo cards since whenever I opened product and got them, I'd look at the first A* player and if it didnt have the A*B*, I wouldn't flip the rest over.

And thats another interesting find on the Hill, I'll update the list. Now I'm wondering if it affected all six sheets (Reardon, Osuna and Bergman don't seem to have this variation...).

Lots of great work Pat, I think a those of us who dig this strange set really appreciate this!

[steve B]

A few thoughts on the *A*B cards.

The process was still very manual, I believe it changed in 92, but the 91s are all a familiar process.

Repeated text would have been done one of a couple ways.
The camera ready art could have the common lines of text pasted in place, with the parts that weren't needed simply cut out.

Or it was blocked on the mask as that part was being set up. (More like the text was all there, and blocked by the mask material and the appropriate bits cut away to reveal the text. )

Topps most probably did a half sheet of camera ready art at a time.

If you notice, the *A only has a space between it and the rest of the text.
So they would have slipped up on the first section of *A sheet and exposed the entire *A*B etc.

Once they decided to fix it, it would be a simple matter of blocking it out with the special red whiteout used in the stripping dept.


It could be fixed on the plate itself, but I would expect they just figured on fixing it when they made another plate for Blue on the back. Otherwise we'd probably see a handful of repairs or incomplete erasures.

[Pat R]

[QUOTE=jacksoncoupage;2419844][QUOTE=Pat R;2419828]

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage

I agree that layouts didn't change.

It seems like you are onto something with A*B* cards. Its just so bizarre to me that only 1/2 the sheet would get it but I understand why you think so, it sure is looking that way. I wish I had kept better track of the A*B* cards as they turned up, I had just assumed this entire time that all A* cards got the A*B* treatment at some point in the production run.

This means that I'll have to take another look at my bold logo cards since whenever I opened product and got them, I'd look at the first A* player and if it didnt have the A*B*, I wouldn't flip the rest over.

And thats another interesting find on the Hill, I'll update the list. Now I'm wondering if it affected all six sheets (Reardon, Osuna and Bergman don't seem to have this variation...).

Lots of great work Pat, I think a those of us who dig this strange set really appreciate this!

I have been doing some deep digging on the variations the past few weeks and here are some of my thoughts on them.

There seem to be 3 or 4 different groups that a particular variation can be placed in and I think that had to do with the printing stages that can be broken down into A-B-C or A-B-C-D.

What I mean by that is I think each printing was kind of like an assembly line. I really only collected baseball cards and a very small amount of football cards back then so I don't know the timeframe on the basketball and hockey that well.

I know topps printed a wide variety of cards but if I'm not mistaken the 4 sports were their biggest volume.

The 91 baseball printing probably started when they were in the middle to the end of either the 90 basketball or hockey printing and that's where I think the A printing of the 91 baseball started before moving to to the B and possibly C printing when the 90 basketball or hockey was finishing up. When the 91 football printing got in full swing that's when the C and or D period of the 91 baseball printing stage started.

I think that's where the variations are broken down into groups with the scarce variations printed in either the A or C/D stage and the common variations were printed in between.

The #21 Joe Morgan card is a good example of the different stages. there are 3 or 4 different variations I think I have one where the top of the 1 is clipped off but I couldn't locate it to see if it is the "tilted" or regular printed variation but either way I think it was just a period where there was some kind of obstruction for a short period during one of those printings.

The 87 hits was printed during the A stage and it is actually scarce enough that it might have shared that stage with the "tilted" 1 variation. I think the "tilted" variation was printed during part of the B stage and possibly the A stage also before the correction was made and the regular 187 was printed for the remainder of the printing.
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

While looking for the clipped variation I found the higher 1 variation that I had forgot about. I had it with some other early variations so I think it might have been the first 187 variation.
img538.jpg

I also noticed that the tilted 1 variation has a bunch of lines in the inner pink areas that the other variations don't have. I will have to check and see if all of the tilted 1's have these.
img534 - Copy.jpg

[ALR-bishop]

Amazing stuff, but I am sticking with just my 2 versions of Morgan

[Pat R]

Do the partial bold logos seem to be a fairly scarce print flaw to others or is it just what I'm experiencing with the 91 Topps that I have?

91 Topps partial bold logo.jpg

[Pat R]

I'm in the process of trying to come up with a printing timeline on the corrections that were made to some of the errors. I will post what I know when I get everything organized but here is some of what I have so far. Some of the early corrections were Chamberlain and Mattingly 101 hits while some of the latest corrections were Comstock Mariners and the Bradley #717 and McReynolds #105 checklists.

[jacksoncoupage]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I'm in the process of trying to come up with a printing timeline on the corrections that were made to some of the errors. I will post what I know when I get everything organized but here is some of what I have so far. Some of the early corrections were Chamberlain and Mattingly 101 hits while some of the latest corrections were Comstock Mariners and the Bradley #717 and McReynolds #105 checklists.

Hi Pat,

I have found over and over again that Mattingly was a later correction. I have opened boxes as recently as December 2023 that had corrected Comstocks and Mattinglys with 10 hits.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage

Hi Pat,

I have found over and over again that Mattingly was a later correction. I have opened boxes as recently as December 2023 that had corrected Comstocks and Mattinglys with 10 hits.

Hi Dylan,

Maybe I'm wrong about the Mattingly. I have opened a few boxes that I documented and kept separated and I thought I had a couple of Mattingly 101 hits variations in an earlier box. I have everything documented but I haven't looked all of the information over thoroughly yet. I do know that I have 25-30 Comstocks and only one is the Mariner variation.

[jacksoncoupage]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Hi Dylan,

Maybe I'm wrong about the Mattingly. I have opened a few boxes that I documented and kept separated and I thought I had a couple of Mattingly 101 hits variations in an earlier box. I have everything documented but I haven't looked all of the information over thoroughly yet. I do know that I have 25-30 Comstocks and only one is the Mariner variation.

I no longer have documentation but what I remember from my last big 1991 Topps experiment in 2015-2016 was that Topps had two different packaging types

• Picture Cards product
• Bubble Gum Cards product

Certain variations were found in only one of those packaging types (Whiten, Drabek, Hoiles errors for example) while their common corrected versions could be found in both packaging types. Meanwhile, other variation-affected cards could be found in both types of packaging, also in both their error or corrected version depending on what time in the print run.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage

I no longer have documentation but what I remember from my last big 1991 Topps experiment in 2015-2016 was that Topps had two different packaging types

• Picture Cards product
• Bubble Gum Cards product

Certain variations were found in only one of those packaging types (Whiten, Drabek, Hoiles errors for example) while their common corrected versions could be found in both packaging types. Meanwhile, other variation-affected cards could be found in both types of packaging, also in both their error or corrected version depending on what time in the print run.

The only variations that I haven't pulled from the Bubble Gum cards is the Bush no print code and the Whiten hand outside border. All of the other variations I have pulled from the Bubble Gum Cards products.

[Pat R]

I just finished comparing the information on a couple of boxes that I opened and it seems apparent that it's as much about where they were printed as it is when with some of the variations.

Both boxes were from a later printing and both were 15 count cellos.

With the variations that I outlined in red boxes if everything was printed in the same place some of the variations would had to have been corrected and then become incorrect a 2nd time which seems highly unlikely.

I would speculate that the glow back sheets were printed in a different place/area from the non glow back sheets.

[IMG][/IMG]

[Pat R]

I just finished going through a 34 count cello box that I had opened a few weeks ago and now I am certain that I am right about some of the variations being printed at the same time but in different areas.

It is an interesting box with 1/2 of the B sheet cards having bold no glow logos and the other 1/2 glow no bold. Also there wasn't a single E or F sheet card in the entire box.

All of these cards came from that box
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[Rich Klein]

Just a reminder that I do my best to add variations I can figure out (not just in 1991 Topps) to the COMC Data Base. You can either

1) Send Correction Requests to get variations in

2) DM me here. I know Dylan does DM me at times and we have conversations as appropriate

Rich

[Pat R]

Here's a Jesse Orosco variation from an early box that came before the hand-drawn 5 in the 1984 strikeouts.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[ALR-bishop]

Fascinating stuff in this thread about what is now a 30 + year old set. At the same time I have been following the research of another member on the printing processes and oddities of the 70 year old 52 set. Am enjoying watching both efforts. I have to think the Topps people that put these sets would be amazed at the deep dives into stuff they likely viewed as very basic get the product out the door process

[saucywombat]

Noticed that some players have an essentially identical dark spot or hashmark on the the "4" in the the "40 Years of Baseball" Logo. Most players have a corrected version but some do not. Most with corrected versions are equally divided in quantity between mark and corrected versions.

An interesting aspect is that all of the players are on either the Tigers, Braves or Cardinals.

772 - Kent Mercker (Braves)
743 - Bryn Smith (Cardinals)
742 - Tommy Gregg (Braves)
693 - Francisco Cabrera (Braves)
684- Milt Cuyler (Tigers)
632 - Lloyd Moseby (Tigers)
566 - Craig Wilson (Cardinals)
533 - Odibe McDowell (Braves)
519 - Sparky Anderson (Tigers)
498 - Mark Salas (Tigers)
492 - Ernie Whitt (Braves)
383 - Pete Smith (Braves)
351 - Joe Torre (Cardinals)
185 - Joe Magrane (Cardinals)
160 - Vince Coleman (Cardinals)
88 - Bob Tewksbury (Cardinals)
75 - Jack Morris (Tigers)
41 - Ken Dayley (Cardinals)

Curious if any "corrected" versions come only from factory sets. Or if some were never corrected?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by saucywombat

Noticed that some players have an essentially identical dark spot or hashmark on the the "4" in the the "40 Years of Baseball" Logo. Most players have a corrected version but some do not. Most with corrected versions are equally divided in quantity between mark and corrected versions.

An interesting aspect is that all of the players are on either the Tigers, Braves or Cardinals.

772 - Kent Mercker (Braves)
743 - Bryn Smith (Cardinals)
742 - Tommy Gregg (Braves)
693 - Francisco Cabrera (Braves)
684- Milt Cuyler (Tigers)
632 - Lloyd Moseby (Tigers)
566 - Craig Wilson (Cardinals)
533 - Odibe McDowell (Braves)
519 - Sparky Anderson (Tigers)
498 - Mark Salas (Tigers)
492 - Ernie Whitt (Braves)
383 - Pete Smith (Braves)
351 - Joe Torre (Cardinals)
185 - Joe Magrane (Cardinals)
160 - Vince Coleman (Cardinals)
88 - Bob Tewksbury (Cardinals)
75 - Jack Morris (Tigers)
41 - Ken Dayley (Cardinals)

Curious if any "corrected" versions come only from factory sets. Or if some were never corrected?

Hi Dave, in my experience what you are calling the "corrected" versions are only found on no glow backs

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by saucywombat

Noticed that some players have an essentially identical dark spot or hashmark on the the "4" in the the "40 Years of Baseball" Logo. Most players have a corrected version but some do not. Most with corrected versions are equally divided in quantity between mark and corrected versions.

An interesting aspect is that all of the players are on either the Tigers, Braves or Cardinals.

772 - Kent Mercker (Braves)
743 - Bryn Smith (Cardinals)
742 - Tommy Gregg (Braves)
693 - Francisco Cabrera (Braves)
684- Milt Cuyler (Tigers)
632 - Lloyd Moseby (Tigers)
566 - Craig Wilson (Cardinals)
533 - Odibe McDowell (Braves)
519 - Sparky Anderson (Tigers)
498 - Mark Salas (Tigers)
492 - Ernie Whitt (Braves)
383 - Pete Smith (Braves)
351 - Joe Torre (Cardinals)
185 - Joe Magrane (Cardinals)
160 - Vince Coleman (Cardinals)
88 - Bob Tewksbury (Cardinals)
75 - Jack Morris (Tigers)
41 - Ken Dayley (Cardinals)

Curious if any "corrected" versions come only from factory sets. Or if some were never corrected?

You can add #725 Ron Gant to the list. Also I can confirm that the following cards exist both with and without the Mark.

#743 - Bryn Smith
#725 - Ron Gant
#684 - Milt Cuyler
#566 - Craig Wilson
#533 - Odibe McDowell
#498 - Mark Salas
#383 Pete Smith
#351 - Joe Torre
#185 - Joe Magrane
#88 - Bob Tewkesbury
#75 - Jack Morris

I also have #693 Francisco Cabrera and #519 Sparky Anderson with very faint marks

[saucywombat]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Hi Dave, in my experience what you are calling the "corrected" versions are only found on no glow backs

I'll have to check it out if I find time to go bank into the moster box 1991 Topps archives.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by saucywombat

I'll have to check it out if I find time to go bank into the moster box 1991 Topps archives.

If there are any without the mark found on a glow back they would have to be quite scarce. I checked all of my 91 Topps and here's what I have.

#75 Jack Morris - 32 total 10 without the mark all with no glow backs
#88 Bob Tewksbury - 27 total 12 no mark all no glow
#185 Joe Magrane - 27 total 12 no mark all no glow
#351 Joe Torre - 30 total 11 no mark all no glow
#383 Pete Smith - 33 total 5 no mark all no glow
#498 Mark Salas - 26 total 6 no mark all no glow
#533 Oddibe McDowell - 23 total 6 no mark all no glow
#566 Craig Wilson - 25 total 7 no mark all no glow
#684 Milt Cuyler - 23 total 3 no mark all no glow
#725 Ron Gant - 37 total 16 no mark all no glow
#743 Bryn Smith - 27 total 13 no mark all no glow