![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Darren---I think there may be 4 different fronts, the three you posted and one where the blue is even at the white but does not extend into it...or not as far
![]() Last edited by ALR-bishop; 06-26-2015 at 04:02 PM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I've examined that difference before, but to me it's just a printing anomaly with regard to the registration of the color plates. The cyan/blue isn't perfectly aligned, but Topps didn't make any purposeful changes to the printing plates like the other versions, which show true differences.
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land ![]() https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm Looking to trade? Here's my bucket: https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706 I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice. Casey Stengel Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s. Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow. ![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Darren, you are a card. I am sure Topps worked very hard to get all of these versions just so.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
As you look through the cropping pictures go back and forth, notice the height of the checklist boxes relative to the card numbers. All part of the cropping differences.
I have never seen a variation in the first series 1972 CL, card #4. I suspect it is because it was part of a 132 card series. The first series did include the 2nd series checklist but the 1st CL was not double printed. Ditto for the 1973 BB set of 660--five series of 132. The decision by Topps to not double print the first series or show a preview CL of the next series was followed shortly by a shift to a full release of cards vs series by series. Whether or not that started in 1974 or 1973 has been oft debated here. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for chipping in Carlton
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
That's very interesting about the '72 CL, and seems to make perfect sense. The layout of that particular checklist is so basic, with hardly anything going on except a straight list of names (no copyright appearing, etc.), that it would be pretty easy to spot a variation if one did exist.
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land ![]() https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm Looking to trade? Here's my bucket: https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706 I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice. Casey Stengel Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s. Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow. ![]() |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The 1970 Topps #9 checklist card is most likely single printed also as it seems to command a premium over other 70 Topps checklist cards.
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1967 Topps Baseball #500 Marichal variation | variation-man | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 08-20-2014 07:47 PM |
1967 Phillies Rookies Variation | Gr8Beldini | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 2 | 10-03-2013 03:16 PM |
New Minor 1967 Variation | JollyElm | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 3 | 08-22-2013 02:11 PM |
1967 Master Reference File of Packard Bell's 1967 sponsorship of the L.A. Dodgers | Archive | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 0 | 05-25-2008 04:44 PM |