[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

There has been evidence posted for 17 of the 24 rows of the two slits. These known rows exhibit (so far) the following frequencies:

row A (Pinson) - 4x
row B (Ferrara) - 2x
row C (NL RS) - 2x
row D (Colavito) - 2x
row E (check 7) - 2x
row F (Sox RS) - 3x
row G (Orioles RS) - 2x

So, if a 4x3 & 3x4 pattern was used, the Pinson row could not be part of the remaining 7 rows. This means that at least one of the other rows (and most likely 2) have to abut different rows in the remaining 7 than what we already know exists.

Out of the 60+ miscuts already known, not one has shown evidence that this is true. The available evidence (miscuts, uncut material) still supports a 1x5, 1x4, 5x3 row distribution.

I wouldn't rely on POP reports, particularly those of graded cards, to assess row distributions since such reports rely on collectors submitting cards subject to fee structures. These fees may (probably?) support high value cards being graded more frequently relative to their lower value brethren.

For example, in the 1966 highs, we know the pattern of both slits (thanks to a lot of effort from people in this forum). We know that the McCovey (550), Williams (580), and Salmon (594) card are in the same row. Despite this, a recent PSA POP report showed that McCovey had 979 submissions, Williams had 764, and Salmon had 187. Another example shows that Tony Taylor (585), who heads one of the 4x rows, had 222 submissions whereas the Grant/Shirley RS, a card in one of the 3x rows, had 633 submissions.

I try to factor out the higher value cards when looking at pops but it's sometimes inconsistent with other results and you can't factor for cards that are often off-center or miscut. I also wonder if Topps had some way to auto-reject really bad cuts.

At one point Topps kept reference copies of all their sheets in Duryea but they were sold off in various ways over several years. Maddening.