Options
1954 Topps baseball thickness question SCANS ADDED
RookieWax
Posts: 1,066 ✭✭✭
I bought a good size lot of these.....some cards seem noticeably thinner than others though. It's not just big stars that are the thinner ones. Some of the commons are thinner too. Is this common...or a red flag?
0
Comments
I'm guessing they were probably in screw downs at some time.
Not sure if this is what you have or not?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/589011/1954-topps-sports-illustrated
Thank for the replies. The thinner cards look to be about the thickness of 1970s/1980s Topps cards...and obviously bend a bit easier than the thicker ones. The texture and print looks the same as the thicker ones under magnification...which is why it is so puzzling. Any more thoughts?
Reprint possibilities. scans?
Here is a scan of the Mays...it is one of the thinner stock cards.
It's possible the "thicker" cards have the commonly found rougher cuts on the left and right sides. After some handling the rough cut can flare out a bit and give the appearance that it's a thicker card. The Mays has a sharper cut on the left and right so the smoother edges won't make the card look thicker. The Mays also has a waviness look to it, the sort of wavy look cards can pick up after being smashed down a long time in a screw down.
Are all of the thinner cards creased like the Mays? They were probably flattened in screw downs to ease the creases
No.. all of the thinner cards do not have creases.
The '54 Mays you pictured is perfectly legit, if that's what you're worried about -- thicker stock or no. Besides what can happen to a card in the course of its life, from the start the cardboard stock Topps printed these on in 1954 may have varied in its thickness, they may have run short on supply of a given amount and had to replenish with different (thinner) stock, etc.
I appreciate the comments.