1958 Topps Error card question

[vintagecpa]

I was researching the 1958 master set. Obviously, the Herrera error card is one of the key cards. My question is why is this card considered an error card and needed as part of the master set? In the examples I have seen, the "a" isn't missing, but only partially missing because of a quality control issue with the printing. I just don't see the big deal with this card. If every card with these type of issues was considered an error card, it would be impossible for any master set to ever be completed. Any thoughts?

[ALR-bishop]

The card can be found with the "a" missing or partially missing. You are right it is a print defect, much like the 1957 Bakep "variation". Today, with the proliferation in discovered error/defects with ebay scans, it would likely not make the cut, but it was an early on discovery and is now part of hobby lore and legend.


I have the missing a card, but also have a misprint in which he has 2 noses, two mouths and 4 eyes. The latter is a much more interesting card.

Another border line issue is the 52 Campos black star. There is another Campos with portions of the front upper left border missing. Then there are the 52 Mantle, Thompson and Robinson double print cards in which the stitches can run left or right...variations ? The debate is endless. Does a variation have to occur only when the manufacturer makes an intended change in a card ? Such as the 3 59 Spahn DOB cards.

Another example of what you refer to is the 1959 Haywood Sullivan variations. I think all 3 are in SCD and in the Registry ( could be wrong about the later). The differences involve a copyright with or without the circle on the back, and with or without the period ( .) after the "A" in USA....are all 3 print defects, or variations, or are 2 of them variations and one a print defect

I know Doug G will agree with you :-)

[vintagecpa]

That is interesting. I guess I don't knows much history about the error card as I should. I see some Herrera examples in which the "a" is completely missing. However, for those cards, the "r" is faded also.

In my opinion, it is similar to owning a card with a black line down the middle. It was obviously a printing flaw that didn't get caught. I don't see why it would turn a $2 card into a card worth more than the Mantle. Has there been attempts by card doctors to made normal Herrera cards look like the error?

[steve B]

It would be pretty tough to remove the black without also removing some of the blue behind it. I'm sure it's been tried.

Pre internet there were a lot of things that were challenging. Errors and variations were one of those. If a card made the list of someone who had some influence it would be on many want lists. But printing technology of the time made it very expensive to make a list with pictures. So all anyone could rely on was some authorities list of what existed.

Even in 78 when the proto Beckett book came out there weren't many variations listed. There was a variation book by Ralph Nozaki in I think 75, and that may be where some of the listings originated. I know his book has the Bakep and the herrer listed.

Like many lists it had its faults. I heard when I got my copy that he wouldn't list any card he hadn't seen in person. A decent but limiting policy. There was also some talk that some stuff made the list because he had a bunch of them. Not such a good policy. (Both I class as rumors only, I never met him so I have no firsthand knowledge) His listing of uncorrected errors must have taken hundreds of hours with thousands of cards. With fringe areas of collecting you simply won't find anyone cataloging the stuff that doesn't collect it or deal in it.

Once a variation is acepted as a variation it's hard to delist it. And if it's an uncommon but flashy printing error it will get expensive making it that much harder to delist. Company size can affect that as well, Upper deck reprinted their own cards at least once with the extra printing going to friends. Those cards are beckett listed, and graded by any grading company. Star basketball seems to have either reprinted or understated the actual print runs and they're pretty much out. (Licensing is involved as well?)

I take a very technical view of variations, one that not many agree with. To me a variation is a diference on the plate, wether accidental or deliberately corrected. I've taken to the term varieties for anything minor and mostly unrecognized.

The Herrer is a puzzle. I'm not really sure how to classify it. It looks like an underinked card, but underinked in one area. The cards near it should have been affected in some way. But I haven't seen a mention of them. It could be from a plate that didn't get completely developed, but then, it's inconsistent. So there would have to be at least two and from what I'm reading here probably several plates that didn't get exposed or developed correctly. And that makes little to no sense even with the poor quality control.
So it's probably a fairly common somewhat consistent and major printing flaw - which is quite unusual.

Steve B

[ALR-bishop]

Good post Steve. I think Bob L has removed some listings from SCD that no longer make the cut, like border gaps, but removing cards like Herrer, Bakep or the black star Campos would be hard at this point given the value attached to them in the hobby. Dick Gilkeson also did a very good publication on card variations in all sports. I think it was first published in 1988 and updated through 1995. He would publish variations/errors he had heard about but note them as unverified.

A good example of more modern cards with defects like the Herrer having a harder time gaining acceptance today are the missing "black" cards in the 1990 Topps set that are apparently related to the No Name Thomas, which is recognized and draws big bucks. The defects on the other cards from the same sheet are less recognizable and were later discoveries. I think they have now been listed in Beckett and the thread on CU about these cards and the Thomas provide an interesting look into how some of these defects may occur

[steve B]

Being in the middle of a huge batch of 1981 Topps I can say that border gaps are often what I'd call variations. When I find corrected ones there are usually about 3x as many with the gap as without. (For 81 topps, others may be different)

But I also agree that they are somewhat trivial ones, and with no extra value aren't necessarily worthy of being included in a general catalog. While I collect them, I'd rather see more sets included than trivial varieties.


In stamps it's handled by ther being a very large general cataog, then another for just the US that goes into more detail. After that there are some very specialized catalogs and books often dealing with one particular set or even one particular stamp. And those are detailed enough that they are updated once avery 20 years or so if at all. One that I use was made in the 1960's. Another was done briefly in a series of articles over the last couple years as a condensed version of a book. The book was only done in a couple copies, and I'd have to travel to the APS in Pennsylvania to read it.

Steve B

[ALR-bishop]

I have a fairly narrow definition of variation... a card that was intentionally changed for some reason, such as the 52 red and black backs or the Sain/ Page corrections from that year. Even then the line can blur, such as with the 69 whites or 58 yellows....but I collect variations, errors, print defects and "varieties" to go with my sets because I find them all interesting

[philliesphan]

Levi Bleam used to have a number of these errors showing various missing letters, including one that was totally missing "RA" and one that was even missing part of the E, and all of the RA.

M

[Blackie]

Im trying to complete this set as well and this Herre card is no where to be found. Seems like i have seen one a few years back in one of the big auction houses but the allure of the hunt has ended with much spent brass and no real trophy. Has anyone see this card as of recent??

[mets41]

does anyone have the current contact info for Ralph Nozaki?

[ALR-bishop]

Did not see that one coming.

[steve B]

Not positive, and I don't know if he's still in the hobby, but this might help.

http://hawkview.org/2012/11/smooth-j...ns-to-the-air/

Steve B

[Rich Klein]

It took a while but Ralph (RIck) did respond to my friend with his e and v question.