1968 topps series 6

[Kevvyg1026]

Because of that sheet configuration, it may be that the pattern was five rows 4x each, and two rows 2x ea. So short prints are probably in lee may and Bryan rows

[jmoran19]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

Because of that sheet configuration, it may be that the pattern was five rows 4x each, and two rows 2x ea. So short prints are probably in lee may and Bryan rows

Not saying its impossible but I've been collecting photos of uncut topps sheets for 25 years and never have run across this pattern for a full 264 card sheet. Have multiple examples where the layout between the two 1/2 sheets for a series are very different.

[Kevvyg1026]

In 65, 66, & 67 the 77 card series had one slit with a pattern of:
slit A: A,B,C, D,E,A,F,G,B, C,D,E while
slit B: two rows, then A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G. Those two rows varied in ech series. Sometimes the two rows were B, C or D, E which gave rise to the 77 card series having four rows printed 3x each (SPs) and three rows 4x each.

On at least one occasion, those two rows were A, F which produced one row 5x, one row 4x, and five rows 3x each. In 1961, a slightly different arrangement was used, which resulted in only a few SPs.

I have seen some miscuts from this series that suggests the row with Niekro, Alston, Hamilton,& Freehan is at the bottom of the 2nd slit. The ebay listing counts suggest that the Lee May row is a Sp row as counts for those cards are typically much lower than for cards in other rows.

[jmoran19]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

On at least one occasion, those two rows were A, F which produced one row 5x, one row 4x, and five rows 3x each. In 1961, a slightly different arrangement was used, which resulted in only a few SPs.

Refresh my memory, is this supposedly the 1967 high numbers layout where only the top 5 rows of slit A (right half of 264 card sheet) have been found?

[Kevvyg1026]

The complete left slit of the 67 highs is known as are the top 5 rows of the 2nd slit. Counts over time of the ebay listing also support the 1x5, 1x4, and 5x3 layout.

For the 68s, the card counts (ebay listings) of the Tracewski, Stephenson, and F Robby (500) are much higher than the counts for the May, Bryan, Von Hoff, & Robby checklist. So, it may be that a 3x4 & 4x3 arrangement was actually used, but that hasn't yet been fully established.

There are a few miscuts from the Stephenson row that suggest that row may be at the bottom of slit B.

[jmoran19]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

The complete left slit of the 67 highs is known as are the top 5 rows of the 2nd slit. Counts over time of the ebay listing also support the 1x5, 1x4, and 5x3 layout.

For the 68s, the card counts (ebay listings) of the Tracewski, Stephenson, and F Robby (500) are much higher than the counts for the May, Bryan, Von Hoff, & Robby checklist. So, it may be that a 3x4 & 4x3 arrangement was actually used, but that hasn't yet been fully established.

Neither has the 1x5, 1x4, and 5x3 layout IMO

[Kevvyg1026]

I am a believer that the 1967 Topps highs had a pattern whereby the Pinson row was printed 5x, the Rohr RC row was printed 4x, and the other five rows were printed 3x.

The 5 row sequence of slit B plus ebay counts over many months suggest that the rows headed by Ferrara, NL Rookies, Colavito, Checklist 7, and Belanger RC were all printed at the same frequency while the cards in the other two rows (Pinson, Ferrara) have higher quantities, with the Pinson row being much higher.

Obviously, without the bottom half of the 2nd slit from the 1967 highs available, the pattern can't be known unequivocally, and it is certainly possible that some other pattern may have been used, but there is circumstantial evidence to support that a 1x5, 1x4, and 5x3 print pattern was used. IMO