1991 Topps Desert Shield - What We Know & How to Spot a Fake

[ALR-bishop]

Great info and commentary Zach....except for the part about Joe being "illustrious"....unless that means he glows fluorescent under a black light

[Zach Wheat]

Ben,

First, here is a fake logo with explanation. Close but no cigar. I am not sure which card this came from....might have been the Boggs we discussed.

Z

[Zach Wheat]

I should have added that I initially suspected this card was fake because it was initially printed on an A or B sheet without a Bold "40th Anniversary" logo.. All known Desert Shield cards printed on Sheet A or B should have a bold 40th Anniversary logo.

This card did not have that and then I started looking at the logo more closely. This was the best "fake" DS card I have seen.

Z

[Zach Wheat]

Ben,

Here is a legit logo. The quickest way to identify a legit logo for me is that the embossing isn't fuzzy, you can see the stars in the flag and the tip of the lowest palm leaf is between the "R" & "A".

Z

[RobDerhak]

Great write up and thorough.

One thing you may change in the OP...

The tip of the bottom most palm leaf should point between the "E & R" in " O P E R A T I O N" instead of shifted.


The way this is worded (at least the way I interpreted it) is that on legit cards this is where the leaf should point...I looked through the ones I have and all pointed at the 'R A gap' and thought they were all bogus since they weren't at the 'E R gap'...then I got to your later post where it is spelled out clearer and breathed a sigh of relief

Just a little confusing if someone comes in & only reads the OP.

Like I said though, great instant resource of basically all that is known about them.

I'll add in that all indications are the packaging is the exact same as the regular issue...I talked to Steve Hart @ Baseball Card Exchange about this release when I found those unopened boxes (that turned out to not be DS), and he said he has seen both wax and cellophane packs contain DS cards.

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by RobDerhak

Great write up and thorough.

One thing you may change in the OP...

The tip of the bottom most palm leaf...

I talked to Steve Hart @ Baseball Card Exchange about this release when I found those unopened boxes (that turned out to not be DS), and he said he has seen both wax and cellophane packs contain DS cards.

Good suggestion. Changed the wording....and I did not know DS cards could be found in both wax & cello. Still learning.

Z

[bnorth]

Here is a pic of the only 2 I have. They both glow and the Boggs has the Bold back along with a wax stain. The one on the right seems to be a little thicker/heavier foil.

[RobDerhak]

Originally Posted by Zach Wheat

....and I did not know DS cards could be found in both wax & cello. Still learning.

Z

I was surprised too...He told me there was no way to discern between Reg & DS, not satisfied with that I told him the unsealed boxes I found were cello and the vids of DS I had seen were Wax to see if that was a quick disqualifier, and said "Nope, no way to know without rippin'," so I guess he didn't say the words "I've seen both" but he sure implied it.

[4reals]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Great info and commentary Zach....except for the part about Joe being "illustrious"....unless that means he glows fluorescent under a black light

I have spent many a night glowing under black lights but can honestly say I have never been described as illustrious. I got a tickle out of that, thank you. I must, however, give credit where credit is due. I learned of the glow backs on the base Topps set from a random Steve B. post buried in the archives. If anyone is illustrious it is he. I just went obsessive compulsive with it and discovered the fact of the DS cards along the way. Love that you compiled everything in one post Zach, makes it super easy to find, great work, brother.

[bsuttonosu]

Zach - First off, thank you for pulling this together in a post. As a player collector with a checklist of over 700 unique George Brett cards to run down I depend heavily on posts like these when researching rarer cards. Much appreciated.

A couple of questions...

"The tip of the bottom most palm leaf should point between the "R & A" in " O P E R A T I O N"; fake logos have the word " OPERATION" shifted slightly to the left."

In looking at the pictures, should this say that the word on fakes is shifted to the RIGHT? Thus making the leaf hit further left in the word between E and R on fakes versus between R & A on real cards?

I'm also wondering if there's variation in the intensity of fluorescing? I have both the base and record breaker Bretts. It's obvious on the base. Foil looks right and the red logo glows bright. On the RB, the foil looks the same, the red border on the back fluoresces but the logo not so much. Maybe it's just harder to see with the text over it on the RB versus the stat back.

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by bsuttonosu

Zach - First off, thank you for pulling this together in a post. As a player collector with a checklist of over 700 unique George Brett cards to run down I depend heavily on posts like these when researching rarer cards. Much appreciated.

A couple of questions...

"The tip of the bottom most palm leaf should point between the "R & A" in " O P E R A T I O N"; fake logos have the word " OPERATION" shifted slightly to the left."

In looking at the pictures, should this say that the word on fakes is shifted to the RIGHT? Thus making the leaf hit further left in the word between E and R on fakes versus between R & A on real cards?

I'm also wondering if there's variation in the intensity of fluorescing? I have both the base and record breaker Bretts. It's obvious on the base. Foil looks right and the red logo glows bright. On the RB, the foil looks the same, the red border on the back fluoresces but the logo not so much. Maybe it's just harder to see with the text over it on the RB versus the stat back.

B,

Not all fake logos have the word OPERATION shifted to the left. The best faked DS cards I have seen show this trait though. The other Fake DS cards have other "tells" like fuzzy logos etc. Just to be clear....on legit DS cards, the tip of the palm leaf is pointy and almost looks like it is dripping....and will come down between the letters "R A" in OPERATION.

The red ink on the reverse of the card in the "40th Anniversary" logo will glow strongly. There will be different variations in the strength of its glow - but you should notice it glowing. It appears that when they first started printing with the brightener added to the red ink - making it fluoresce - there was some variability. Following is Joe 4Reals original pic of the glow backs. You can see the red trim on the card glowing really well and the 40th Anniversary logo. You can even see the red ink glowing through the back of an unopened pack.

Z

[Ltlbvr]

Just purchased a raw DS set on eBay. Thanks for the black light tip! Just one card that does not glow. See attached pic.

[jp1216]

Brian! Beauty of a set. What card failed the test?

[Ltlbvr]

Originally Posted by jp1216

Brian! Beauty of a set. What card failed the test?

Thanks Jon. It’s checklist #5. 656, I think.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Ltlbvr

Just purchased a raw DS set on eBay. Thanks for the black light tip! Just one card that does not glow. See attached pic.

Is it a legit DS card? Not all of them glow.

[hockeyhockey]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Is it a legit DS card? Not all of them glow.

double post

[hockeyhockey]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Is it a legit DS card? Not all of them glow.

and there are counterfeit ones that glow, too. there's tons of glowback 1991 regular topps cards, so the unwashed miscreants now use them to dupe people.

i started to build the DS set and realized that 20 cards i acquired were fakes. did a quick 180 and sold off all the legit ones. that's not a project i'd be comfortable building.

[Ltlbvr]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Is it a legit DS card? Not all of them glow.

Honestly, I need to learn more. It’s a checklist, so no gold stamp. Checklist #5. 656, I think. Any tips on authenticating?