1968 Topps Johnny Bench Rookie, variation or printing flaw error?

[savedfrommyspokes]

Cliff, looks like Dean is all over this variation:

http://www.deanscards.com/search?s=1968+topps+247


Based on a small sample size, an approximate ratio appears to be for every two cards with "the", there is one copy with "tne". Not super rare, but very interesting.

[ALR-bishop]

This card is a great example of why it is so hard to define a variation versus a recurring print defect. Was this a printing error that was discovered and intentionally corrected, or was it just a recurring print defect that went unnoticed for a period of time during print runs, like the 58 Herrer or 57 Bakep. Or does it even matter ? If it does not matter then is any recurring print defect a variation ?

[curtis-cards]

Interesting...I'll have to look at mine

[deweyinthehall]

Picking up this thread from 6 years ago - I suppose the basic question for many (myself included) is this: did Topps accidentally send this card to the presses with the word "the" misspelled with an "n", or was there something blocking the black ink on a series of runs which resulted in a chopped off "h" which looks like an "n"? I tend to think a misspelling like this would be very unusual.

Any thoughts?

[jchcollins]

I've seen this generally accepted as a variation for some time now. To my knowledge one is not worth more than the other. This kind of thing if you are paying attention was incredibly common with 1960's Topps cards. The QC process just wasn't what it is today.

[JollyElm]

I recently posted one of the Bench variations I have for sale or trade, so I decided to see what I could determine from zooming in on the back scan.

I copied and pasted an actual 'n' from elsewhere on the card and placed it next to the bastardized 'h' for the sake of comparison, and it seems pretty straight-forward that the two letters are not both lower case n's...

1968benchbackcomp.jpg

Something must have simply blocked the ink meant for the h's ascender (look at my typographic knowledge!!), as the rounded nub above the X-height isn't a match for what appears on an 'n.' It looks like a sheared off 'h.'

[ALR-bishop]

There seems to be no shortage of the misprints, anyone know if this card was a DP.