1966 Topps High's - Any uncut sheets or partial sheets known?

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

Thanks for the Coleman addition. Hopefully, some other miscuts will surface to allow the placement of the remaining 26 cards.

The Perranowski, Cards rookie stars, Taylor, and Salmon must be the start of rows since they are under Northrup and we know all the cards in Northrup's row.

And yes, the McCovey four card panel (McCovey, Adair, Johnson rookie, and Franks) must be cards 5, 6, 7, & 8 in one of the other rows. Therefore, these four cards must be in one of the three rows headed by either Cards Rookies, Taylor, or Salmon since at least five cards are known in the either four rows. I lean towards the Salmon row, but only because that would put several SPs together (Davis, Williams, McCovey), even though it should be clear that current price guide listings of SPs is not completely consistent with the card patterns observed,

Those guide SP patterns are often off because only one half sheet was observed or a box or case was open that had the typical Topps collation of the time (i.e. terrible). This information, right or wrong, ended up in guides for decades (still does sometimes) and the origins often predate the modern guides of the late 70's. Other patterns were often due to to dealer ad hyperbole I'd say.

1966 SP patterns were not known until after the 67's were semi-sussed out but from what I've been seeing in the many 70's hobby pubs I've been scanning is that the 66 highs in general were more expensive in the late 70's than the 67 highs were. One of the innovators in cracking all the series and SP breakdowns was Lew Lipset around 1976-77, who I believe was a Wall St analyst for decade after college (or something quite similar) before turning to stamps, then cards. He seems to have applied his data and analytical expertise to card pricing and figured out a lot of the "good" information. I'm still not to the point where the 66 SP info began appearing in the guides so it would have been in the late 80's. I randomly took out my S-A/Beckett Guide #6 from 1984 and the only '66 SP info was that the #598 Perry card was in short supply even for a set-ender.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Those guide SP patterns are often off because only one half sheet was observed or a box or case was open that had the typical Topps collation of the time (i.e. terrible). This information, right or wrong, ended up in guides for decades (still does sometimes) and the origins often predate the modern guides of the late 70's. Other patterns were often due to to dealer ad hyperbole I'd say.

1966 SP patterns were not known until after the 67's were semi-sussed out but from what I've been seeing in the many 70's hobby pubs I've been scanning is that the 66 highs in general were more expensive in the late 70's than the 67 highs were. One of the innovators in cracking all the series and SP breakdowns was Lew Lipset around 1976-77, who I believe was a Wall St analyst for decade after college (or something quite similar) before turning to stamps, then cards. He seems to have applied his data and analytical expertise to card pricing and figured out a lot of the "good" information. I'm still not to the point where the 66 SP info began appearing in the guides so it would have been in the late 80's. I randomly took out my S-A/Beckett Guide #6 from 1984 and the only '66 SP info was that the #598 Perry card was in short supply even for a set-ender.

Thanks for this background; I've assumed the "SP"'s date from the 70's or 80's, but I only started collecting this set around 2000 and don't have many of the old periodicals. As I recall, 20 years ago Gaylord was still the pre-eminent SP, not 591 Jackson/Shirley. Would love to see what some of the other older material says on this matter. None of the 70's Sport Hobbyist issues I have include dealers designating individual highs as extra special/tough.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by G1911

Thanks for this background; I've assumed the "SP"'s date from the 70's or 80's, but I only started collecting this set around 2000 and don't have many of the old periodicals. As I recall, 20 years ago Gaylord was still the pre-eminent SP, not 591 Jackson/Shirley. Would love to see what some of the other older material says on this matter. None of the 70's Sport Hobbyist issues I have include dealers designating individual highs as extra special/tough.

Definitely some kind of 80's deal for the most part. Beckett's first two price surveys were sets only, plus a couple of odd series like 52 highs. I'll track it down eventually in the old guides.

[toppcat]

CCC ad in The Trader Speaks, August 1979. Check it out:

[G1911]

Originally Posted by toppcat

CCC ad in The Trader Speaks, August 1979. Check it out:

Boy do I wish I had a time machine, 1,200 67 highs for $100. Looks like they still weren't calling out "SP's" as late as 79 then.

[Kevvyg1026]

In the Vol.1 #1 issue of Current Card Prices (Jan 1983) to which Mr. Hornish was a contributor, commons for 1966 from the last series (523-598) were listed at $1.75 each. Cards in that series that carried a premium were 526 (Twins team), 530 (Robin Roberts), 535 (Willie Davis), 540 (McLain), 550 (McCovey), 558 (Scott), 565 (Piersall), 567 (Howser), 580 (Billy Williams), 583 (Tigers team), 590 (Skowron) and 598 (Perry). No mention of 591 or 544 being special!!!

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

In the Vol.1 #1 issue of Current Card Prices (Jan 1983) to which Mr. Hornish was a contributor, commons for 1966 from the last series (523-598) were listed at $1.75 each. Cards in that series that carried a premium were 526 (Twins team), 530 (Robin Roberts), 535 (Willie Davis), 540 (McLain), 550 (McCovey), 558 (Scott), 565 (Piersall), 567 (Howser), 580 (Billy Williams), 583 (Tigers team), 590 (Skowron) and 598 (Perry). No mention of 591 or 544 being special!!!

Still have all the issues I worked on (until early 1985) here and plan to pull them out and look at some of the pricing structures. I can tell you the SP information was almost all culled from other guides and publications, although we created CCP content from the ground up (unlike CPU, which got busted for plagiarizing Beckett's guides). E&V info came from Ralph Nozaki in part and also from the guides; the guy who put out CCP (Richie) was a card dealer as well and knew a lot about what was hot and the card market in general. I put together the inaugural Football and Hockey magazine from scratch over a weekend and then we had a huge blowout from out of the blue and that was it for me.

[mikemb]

Checked out two of my old Wholesale Cards Co. (Bruce Yeko) price lists.

The 1972 list has no short prints and cards 523-598 were 20 cents each and the full 7th series was available fir $12.95. (First scan)

Six years later in 1978, still no short prints listed but the price of the 7th series went up to 30 cents each. The complete 7th series was no longer available. (Second scan)

[Kevvyg1026]

Not sure if this is of interest, but here goes. There were several times during the period 1965 to 1969 that Topps had a print run of 77 cards. This print run would have 7 unique rows of 11 cards each. The big question for some of us is to try to determine the specific pattern that these 7 rows were distributed across the full sheet, which consisted of two half-sheets (or slits) of 12 rows each.

For the half-sheets that I have seen, this is the pattern of the rows observed. I labeled the rows A through G, with A being the row which was at the top of the half-sheet. Just the left half-sheets are shown below.

1965 Series 5 - (Bateman as leading row): A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E
1965 Series 7 - (Gaines as as leading row): A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E
1967 Series 7 - (Pinson as as leading row): A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E
1969 Series 6 - (Rookies as leading row): A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E

Wow. These sheets all exhibited the same pattern so I thought I was on to something!! But, unfortunately, Topps used a different pattern on the right half-sheets I have seen.

1965 Series 5R (Blanchard as leading row): A, B, C, D, E, A, B, F, G, C, D, E
1969 Series 6R (Green as leading row): A, B, C, D, E, F, A, B, G, C, D, E

[Kevvyg1026]

The Sports Americana Price Guide (1979) does not have price distinctions for most of the common high series cards from 1966, although some cards have premiums applied (e.g., team cards, semi-stars, or stars).

The CCP guide from 1983 also does not appear to have price distinctions, although team cards, star cards (Roberts, McCovey, McLain, Williams, and Perry), and presumably semi-stars (Davis, Scott, Piersall, Howser, Skowron) do have a premium applied.

The Baseball Card Price Guide, April 88 issue shows a 2x multiplier for #524, 528, 544, 545, 547, 548, 551, 556, 561, 570, 576, 579, 591, and 593 in addition to premiums for stars and teams. Cards such as 535, 543, 554, 555, 558, 563, 566, 567, 574, 584, 589, 596, and 597 have a minor premium applied to the standard common card pricing, presumably because, they have Dodger, Yankee, Met, Red Sox, or Tiger players.

So, it appears that the SP idea may have germinated sometime between 1983-1988, but as mentioned in an earlier post by Toppcat, the cards apparently designated as SPs probably achieved that distinction because of poor collation or distribution issues rather than actual print quantity variations.

[bb66]

Thanks Kevvy for the new insight. I had never thought about the 7th Series checklist and it's two variations like that. Also, very interesting on the relative price-values from the decade of the '80's.The evolution-change is amazing. Sadly when I got back into the hobby it was the late 80's and prices for the high number 1966 cards were already sky-high(with my budget).Great detective work that is very appreciated by 66 lovers like myself!

[BillP]

Originally Posted by bb66

Thanks Kevvy for the new insight. I had never thought about the 7th Series checklist and it's two variations like that. Also, very interesting on the relative price-values from the decade of the '80's.The evolution-change is amazing. Sadly when I got back into the hobby it was the late 80's and prices for the high number 1966 cards were already sky-high(with my budget).Great detective work that is very appreciated by 66 lovers like myself!

I'll second that. As a 1966 fan and a collector of the high series, I enjoy the insights. One thing I saw in a previous thread, somewhere it says in an ad that cards 591 and 598 were no longer available. That's real interesting as back then 591 would have been just another high number. So I'm still feeling that 591 was replaced on one on the sheets by a checklist or it's position on the outside of a row caused it to be damaged and thrown away,

billp

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by BillP

I'll second that. As a 1966 fan and a collector of the high series, I enjoy the insights. One thing I saw in a previous thread, somewhere it says in an ad that cards 591 and 598 were no longer available. That's real interesting as back then 591 would have been just another high number. So I'm still feeling that 591 was replaced on one on the sheets by a checklist or it's position on the outside of a row caused it to be damaged and thrown away,

billp

Hot cards back in the day would say POR a lot in ads, or just not offered. 591 is the Grant Jackson card, 598 is Gaylord Perry. Dealers in the Northeast (and possibly country-wide) hoarded these for a long time as they believed they were actually short printed. They would not have been replaced on the sheets but their positioning could have damaged them in production causing some to be pulled. Edges and corners are usually the worst places to be on a sheet damage-wise.