So, yes it is interesting that the POP surveys show these results. However, such counts are not necessarily reflective of what took place 50+ years ago. As we have "discovered" for other years (e.g., 1963), some of the lore surrounding short prints that has been accepted for many years is not always entirely accurate.
In the Northrup row, card 581 (martinez) consistently has higher counts than others in the same row. That card is in column 4.
In the Perranowski row, the same thing is true for Chance (564), which is located in column 4.
Most of the cards in the Hoerner row appear to have comparable POPs.
Roberts (#571) has the highest counts on the Taylor row and it is also in column 4.
For the Salmon row, card 533 (Adair) typically has the higher counts, but Franks (537) is not that far behind. Those cards are in columns 6 & 8 respectively. Williams is in column 4, so perhaps his ebay POP count may be influenced by his star & Cub recognition, meaning perhaps people don't want to part with the card.
The Mantilla row has two cards (593, 548) which appear much more often than others in that row. Those two cards are located in 6 and 9. Card 563 (Tovar), located in column 7, normally has the lowest population available for sale. The Column 4 card is the Twins team card, and that usually has a low POP count.
Most of the cards in the Shirley/Jackson row have comparable POPs, although both McLain (540, in C2) and Navarro (527, C4) are typically on the low side.
And for what it matters, I suspect that the Northrup and Salmon rows occupy the top and bottom rows on one slit while the Taylor and Shirley rows most likely occupy the top/bottom rows on the other slit.
Having said all of the above, I still believe that if examined for a long enough period, this type of data would yield a reasonably accurate representation. So, for example, if one examined Worthpoint and removed duplicate sales from the PoP, a more accurate picture might emerge. I wish I had the time and energy to undertake such a project, but alas, I don't. I will have to be content with simply trying to reconstruct the sheet configuration!
|