![]() |
1964 Topps Venezuelan size variations
I just purchased a lot of five 1964 Topps Venezuelan cards on eBay.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/235288052365 I've contacted the seller about this, but also thought I'd seek counsel here. Does anyone have any experience with size variations in the Venezuelan cards? Almost all of the cards in this lot have a side which is a smidge smaller than the standard 2.5x3.25. I'm not suggesting the eBay seller trimmed them, but wondered if it was normal to run across a significant percentage of these which are smaller than minimum size. There's a few where the width is smaller at the top than the width at the bottom. Or the height varies on each side. The differences are extremely small. The corners are a little soft, so they wouldn't have been trimmed to create sharp corners. I don't know what would have been gained by trimming just a teensy bit from part of a side or top/bottom. Was the original cutting quality of these cards when they were produced just worst than typical Topps cards from this era. |
Quote:
Getting back to the cards, I know some Venny sets are notoriously short (1968). Not sure about the 64 set though. I don't measure raw cards when I get them in. |
Thanks for your input. I corresponded with Larry from tampa-bay cards and he was quite helpful. His views mirrored yours.
|
I bought a 1968 Venezuelan Byron Browne from Tampa Bay Cards a few years ago on eBay that is short vertically but that card is so rare I’m just happy to have one.
|
Yes Venezuelan cards vary more than Topps. As far as the 64’s they are probably produced on the most inferior paper stock than any other year. So it’s potentially safe to say that a low grade 64 could easily lose a 1/16 of an inch from just wear.
They are just the most flimsy stock and wear very easy in my opinion. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:52 AM. |