Options
1986 Topps Variations
WinPitcher
Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
Late in the 86 Topps baseball season cards without the red ink on back began showing up. My guess is that 1 sheet had this variety. Henderson can also be found this way. I saw no Clemens and Boggs. I would normally get 1 case of wax per week back then and if my memory is correct, the case in which these cars showed up one or two cards per pack yielded these. Anyone else remember seeing this?
Good for you.
0
Comments
Bob
email bcmiller7@comcast.net
Why don't you write an article for SMR?
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
i never saw a ryan, rose, boggs, clemens etc.
the reason i say they come from one sheet is that all the ones i have all have C4 on the back which I believe is the sheet ID.
Edited to add: Stars on the C sheet include #1 Rose, Hershiser, Mattingly, Ripken and Strawberry. That was a blast going through that set - what a great looking card set; too bad there were no strong rookies!
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
The only thing I know is that towards the end of the BB card season in 1986 a few cases that I had
had these cards in them, generally 2 or 3 in a pack, sometimes less never more. All it appears
came from the same sheet, I sent the Mattingly to PSA after talking to Joe about who I guess
never gave me a firm answer. The grader bounced it back to me and in the package was a copy of what a
86 back should look like. (eyeroll) I simply wanted the card slabbed authentic. I also have the Strawberry
and had a Henderson who I sold or gave to some kid back in the day.
IMO it is a cool variation even if it was unintended.
Steve
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
I wasn't familiar with these at all but they've sparked my interest.
The examples I got back in the day only came from sheet C.
I had at least 2 cases that these would come out from.
I had to make sure all my customers had a shot.
I saved maybe a dozen, I know I have 6 pr 7?
Every once in a while I come across one when I go through my 86 stock.
They are generally commons.
Hope you been well.
Steve
thanks
Topps White Out (silver) letters Alex Gordon
80 Topps Greg Pryor “No Name"
90 ProSet Dexter Manley error
90 Topps Jeff King Yellow back
1958 Topps Pancho Herrera (no“a”)
81 Topps Art Howe (black smear above hat)
91 D A. Hawkins BC-12 “Pitcher”
I would think if they got cataloged and put in a PSA registry some of the star players in high grade would command some very big bucks for the first couple graded.
<< <i>Very interesting that a variation this big that includes some very well known players wasn't much more publicized. Coming late in the year and being an issue nobody really collected that much had something to do with it.
I would think if they got cataloged and put in a PSA registry some of the star players in high grade would command some very big bucks for the first couple graded. >>
I'm pretty certain that these were never cataloged due to the fact that they are "printing flaws", as their reverses are just missing the red ink step in the printing process. There's a long-running idea that is repeated often in the hobby (to this day), that printing flaws devalue the card's worth rather than increase it - this type of outdated thinking seems to have been born and reinforced out of the speculation boom and/or rookie card craze, where people hoarding specific cards wanted immaculate versions only, no matter how interesting the print-error. It's also selectively applied based on the player: 1990 Frank Thomas NNOF, "Purple Hat" Upper Deck Griffey RC, 1986 Topps Clemens "Blue Streak" are all printing flaws that get "official" recognition for their rarity because of who appears on the card and/or if it's a key issue.
I read a ton of old collecting magazines and people would often write in about their discoveries, which sounded like really interesting printing mistakes (not miscuts but stuff like this) only to have their find dismissed as "flawed printer's waste", which is really too bad because if this kind of thinking hadn't been religiously applied to the catalogs and price guides, we'd know very well by today just how rare and collectible things like these really are or aren't (I say RARE in the case of these 1986 Topps... for the record).
Collecting Robin Ventura and Matt Luke.
Richtree....if you want one I can accomodate you. Hard to turn down someone with your enthusiasm for defective cards. PM me
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
<< <i>I would normally get 1 case of wax per week back then...[/IMG] >>
Wait a second. You busted a case of wax every week?
Yep. I had a card store from 1983 til 1990.
I would go through at least a case of wax a week back then.
I did not mean to imply that I opened myself a case per week.
I sold packs and boxes and built sets.
Steve
Topps White Out (silver) letters Alex Gordon
80 Topps Greg Pryor “No Name"
90 ProSet Dexter Manley error
90 Topps Jeff King Yellow back
1958 Topps Pancho Herrera (no“a”)
81 Topps Art Howe (black smear above hat)
91 D A. Hawkins BC-12 “Pitcher”
<< <i>
<< <i>Very interesting that a variation this big that includes some very well known players wasn't much more publicized. Coming late in the year and being an issue nobody really collected that much had something to do with it.
I would think if they got cataloged and put in a PSA registry some of the star players in high grade would command some very big bucks for the first couple graded. >>
I'm pretty certain that these were never cataloged due to the fact that they are "printing flaws", as their reverses are just missing the red ink step in the printing process. There's a long-running idea that is repeated often in the hobby (to this day), that printing flaws devalue the card's worth rather than increase it - this type of outdated thinking seems to have been born and reinforced out of the speculation boom and/or rookie card craze, where people hoarding specific cards wanted immaculate versions only, no matter how interesting the print-error. It's also selectively applied based on the player: 1990 Frank Thomas NNOF, "Purple Hat" Upper Deck Griffey RC, 1986 Topps Clemens "Blue Streak" are all printing flaws that get "official" recognition for their rarity because of who appears on the card and/or if it's a key issue.
I read a ton of old collecting magazines and people would often write in about their discoveries, which sounded like really interesting printing mistakes (not miscuts but stuff like this) only to have their find dismissed as "flawed printer's waste", which is really too bad because if this kind of thinking hadn't been religiously applied to the catalogs and price guides, we'd know very well by today just how rare and collectible things like these really are or aren't (I say RARE in the case of these 1986 Topps... for the record). >>
Good points, its always interesting that things like this would probably be more recognized in the coin collecting world. Think of print errors in stamps,coins,etc, they can get big press but sports cards don't get the same coverage.
Save on ebay with Big Crumbs
gaga over the Topps issue that featured Jeter and Bush and some folks were buying them off ebay for 2-300.00
a pop even though they could buy a box and probably get one. At almost the same time the Washington dollar
was issued and it lacked some incuse wording on the edge, the pres mentioned it and people not normally
in the hobby began rushing banks hoping they could score some so they could sell em on ebay for (100.00 at the peak)
One reason coins get possibly more attention when a new issue has a problem is because everyone can relate
to coins. Not everyone relates to cards. if some of these 80's variations were included in the Standard cat.
we would likely see a market for them.
Steve
Save on ebay with Big Crumbs