1989 Fleer Randy Johnson #381 Marlboro Errors - 30 Years Later

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Statfreak101

Steve, in regards to the blue tint version - how noticeable is/was this card/tint to the naked eye before you really dissected it and noticed the difference in tint?

I only ask because I have a mountain of these and want to know if I need to go through them to see.

I have owned one and believe it might be the one Steve owns. The blue really sticks out. Actually it looks turquoise to me but there is no way you will confuse the blue card with a green tint.

[steve5838]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I have owned one and believe it might be the one Steve owns. The blue really sticks out. Actually it looks turquoise to me but there is no way you will confuse the blue card with a green tint.

I agree with Ben. It is pretty obvious unless you are ripping packs in a room without much light. Of course lighting on some eBay pics makes it difficult to tell for sure.. My rule of thumb for differentiating green vs blue versions beyond tint color, is in the blue version the cowboy is not obscured and there is no bubble.

[Athos01]

I've always thought the "blue" version was more green in my opinion. It just seems to be a lighter shade of green without any black scribble obstruction, when compared to the version commonly labeled "green scribble". Or, turquoise as Ben says, I would agree with that too. I believe junkwaxgems.com shows pretty much all the different versions I've ever owned/seen, as does Steve's photo gallery.

For those interested, the Treadway targets were not early corrections, these appeared randomly relatively early after the Ripken was first corrected. These were not very early errors. I also do not believe the checklists with positions were extremely early errors. These also seem to be some random type variety, but I'm not sure what point they came in the print run. The Boggs is not terribly scarce, the version without the black dot on the reverse can be commonly found in later print runs, well after other errors were corrected.

[steve5838]

Originally Posted by Athos01

I've always thought the "blue" version was more green in my opinion. It just seems to be a lighter shade of green without any black scribble obstruction, when compared to the version commonly labeled "green scribble". Or, turquoise as Ben says, I would agree with that too. I believe junkwaxgems.com shows pretty much all the different versions I've ever owned/seen, as does Steve's photo gallery.

For those interested, the Treadway targets were not early corrections, these appeared randomly relatively early after the Ripken was first corrected. These were not very early errors. I also do not believe the checklists with positions were extremely early errors. These also seem to be some random type variety, but I'm not sure what point they came in the print run. The Boggs is not terribly scarce, the version without the black dot on the reverse can be commonly found in later print runs, well after other errors were corrected.

I agree with Kevin and Ben. The "blue" color is more accurately described as turquoise. Sorry, I am not great with color names. This version really stands out though.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Athos01

I've always thought the "blue" version was more green in my opinion. It just seems to be a lighter shade of green without any black scribble obstruction, when compared to the version commonly labeled "green scribble". Or, turquoise as Ben says, I would agree with that too. I believe junkwaxgems.com shows pretty much all the different versions I've ever owned/seen, as does Steve's photo gallery.

For those interested, the Treadway targets were not early corrections, these appeared randomly relatively early after the Ripken was first corrected. These were not very early errors. I also do not believe the checklists with positions were extremely early errors. These also seem to be some random type variety, but I'm not sure what point they came in the print run. The Boggs is not terribly scarce, the version without the black dot on the reverse can be commonly found in later print runs, well after other errors were corrected.

If the bold part is true it is news to me. I have been hoarding them since I pack pulled one back in the day. I have only ever seen 11 total and own 7 of them.

Yes I know there are 2 on eBay. One is listed by a great guy but he prices things so high Deans pricing seems like a bargain basement giveaway box. The other seller more than doubled their price when I made what I consider a reasonable offer.

[Athos01]

Hi Ben, as I was mostly trying to open early runs, I mostly stayed away from the later print runs (if codes were known). I know I hit many Boggs, but I did not really place them aside as he wasn't someone I was looking for. Certainly, they are far scarcer without the print dot than with, but I know I have many of them sitting somewhere in my common bins. The same applies to Kevin Romine - his card was corrected very late in the print run, so there are far fewer corrected Romine's available than the original error showing Randy Kutcher batting.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Athos01

Hi Ben, as I was mostly trying to open early runs, I mostly stayed away from the later print runs (if codes were known). I know I hit many Boggs, but I did not really place them aside as he wasn't someone I was looking for. Certainly, they are far scarcer without the print dot than with, but I know I have many of them sitting somewhere in my common bins. The same applies to Kevin Romine - his card was corrected very late in the print run, so there are far fewer corrected Romine's available than the original error showing Randy Kutcher batting.

If you ever run across them please remember me.

[Athos01]

I most definitely will Ben, now that I know you're looking for these.

[Statfreak101]

Originally Posted by bnorth

If the bold part is true it is news to me. I have been hoarding them since I pack pulled one back in the day. I have only ever seen 11 total and own 7 of them.

Yes I know there are 2 on eBay. One is listed by a great guy but he prices things so high Deans pricing seems like a bargain basement giveaway box. The other seller more than doubled their price when I made what I consider a reasonable offer.

I have a Boggs no dot in the collection - every time I pull it to look at it, I think about offering it up to you.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Statfreak101

I have a Boggs no dot in the collection - every time I pull it to look at it, I think about offering it up to you.

Stop thinking and email me a pic and price.

[butchie_t]

What is this no dot variation of Wade Boggs? I need to know what it is I am rummaging for.

I have an unopened 1989 Fleer Cello Box I bought years ago, two of them actually. I opened one for the Ripken errors. Both boxes were advertised as error cellos. And they were. I never paid any attention to the RJ's when I opened them and have no idea now as to what version I had pulled from the box.

Does anyone have any mfg dates that they are aware of for the RJ Errors? The code on the box I have is 8611-A, not sure if that helps anyone, but there it is.