![]() |
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
|
Theory About 1963 Fleer FB
1 Attachment(s)
In the process of upgrading both versions of 1963 Fleer #64 Bob Dougherty, I have come to this conclusion:
I know that the set was printed in one sheet, with # 1 down to #8, #9 down to #16, etc., up to #88. There was also a sheet that, for some reason, used #5 down to #8 and #1 down to #4. There was no red stripe on the bottom most card, meaning every card divisible by 4 has both a red stripe version and a no stripe version. I had decided to replace both of these back-stained cards and had no problem finding a no stripe version. In checking on the card WITH a red stripe, I can find only one or two with lots of no stripes available. My theory therefore is that they likely removed both Dougherty and Long in order to insert the checklist later in the run, using the second cited sheet with Dougherty in the fourth spot down and with the red stripe as a result being removed. Thus there is a shortage of the #64 WITH the stripe. I believe that the other version is not really a big SP after all since it likely stayed in the run from the beginning. I am not expecting everyone to follow this, but this is what I am seeing. |
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...a9e6a792cf.jpg
Anyone else see this variation in the 75 Set? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Quote:
|
https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...0Grabowski.jpg
1969 Topps Jim Grabowski blackless and missing some yellow ink https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...n_%20Jimmy.jpg 1969 Topps Jimmy Johnson blackless and missing yellow ink. The backs are perfect. |
I just ran across this one recently. Take a look at the back where it says Topps above the card number. See the difference in location?
Can anyone confirm if this one is reoccurring? I just checked all of the backs on COMC and could not find the variation. It is not like it is a print dot or print smudge. Seems like this one would almost have to be reoccurring. Thoughts? = = = I'm editing this post because I just noticed something right after I posted it. Looks like all of the green on the back is shifted down. Now maybe I'm thinking this might not be reoccurring. Possible, I guess, right? https://i.postimg.cc/0QSFZ73M/013-19...-Variation.jpg |
Neat find Shane. Have not yet seen another
|
Notice that all of the green print has shifted downward on the back of the variant card.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Is this "mermaid tattoo" on Lou's sleeve recurring or a print defect. Curious collectors want to know! (I apologize if I've axed this before--I'm old)
https://caimages.collectors.com/psai...306Sleater.jpg |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:51 AM. |