@Appletrader1 said:
Hello! I found this thread and decided to go dig out my old collection from when I was a kid and lo and behold, a nnof frank thomas along with 4 of the “blackless” cards discussed! I’m honestly just interested in selling these to someone that will appreciate them, so message me and Lmk how/who to reach if you are interested!
I thought this scammer was the first post.. mea culpa
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972) Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
@craig44 said:
Brendon, i am so glad you posted this. i was chomping at the bit to add to this great thread, but this was your story to tell and you did a great job of it!!!
i am also so happy this deal worked out. I feared when we were messaging that the seller may back out before you made the deal. I was speaking with a friend at the December Elks club show and he was interested in the card and had inquired about making a deal for it, but would have needed to do a trade/cash deal. I was nervous that the seller was being offered other deals as well and may sell it out from under you. I was very pleased when you let me know it was in hand.
It is truly a great example of the NNOF and with provenance that the card was pulled right here in the great state of Maine!
long live the CU NNOF thread!!
Thank you for hopping in here and reading my novel!
I did get very lucky. The seller was top notch and a man of his word. Obviously there would be other offers, and possibly someone could have offered to go over the asking price. The card listed on a Saturday, and when I got ahold of him on Monday morning, the seller mentioned he'd had a few messages about it but no serious offers. I think if he had been located in a more populated area in southern Maine it would have sold the first weekend and I would not have gotten it. My marketplace filter is set up to generally only show listings 100 miles from me, and Houlton is 120 miles north of Bangor and 250 miles from Portland.
The icing on the cake was the interesting story behind it and the fact that it was pulled from a 106 card Jumbo Pak, which I had never heard of occurring before. It was all very exciting and also a relief to finally get it in hand. Thank you very much for all the encouragement to get it done. I owe you one!
If anyone has other Thomas misprints to add, please let me know here or email me at jacksoncoupage@yahoo.com. I'd love to fatten the article with additional info if it exists.
Edit: just realized that I did not include the very plentiful blank front Thomas and not sure if I will update.
Nice article! And very interesting read. That yellow back Thomas is interesting. It looks legit. I wish I had something to add, but there aren't any other variants on the regular Thomas #414B I am aware of.
On the NNOF #414A, there are a couple variants that are interesting. I am at risk of repeating myself but since many pictures from old posts have been lost to time or were improperly archived, I'd like to get the pics back up. One example that came up for sale quite a few years ago was a NNOF that had a faded shadow of his name. I don't believe it sold at the asking price at the time which was $10K.
Another print defect unique to the NNOFs is they all have some level of deterioration in the black ink above the "T" in "White Sox", ranging from none, to small areas of blackless, to a full border break well outside of the original blackless swath.
Consider, in order: a well printed NNOF, small amount of blackless in team name, then two examples of border breaks:
In the last example of the four above, the one on the bottom right, I have noticed this phenomenon of debris embedded on several blackless cards as well as other orange sheet cards from the NNOF print run. When looking at scanned copies under extreme magnification it shows that the debris embedded on the cards occurred on only the black printing plate/ rubber blanket, and then was dragged through the press leaving black ink in the affected areas (no other ink color was dragged by the debris). All of the printing experts consulted do not believe anything physical on the presses could have caused this error, so I must defer to them and say that it is likely only coincidental that these blackless cards show physical damage on only the black inked areas. I have seen this on a half dozen or so orange sheet cards from NNOF packs and boxes, and it is seen fairly clearly here on my partial blackless #728 Jim Acker:
As many have said before, someone was clearly asleep at the wheel to let an error as large as the NNOF get out into packs, so it is no surprise that other printing mistakes occurred at a factory running 6 presses at a time, 24 hours a day.
On the subject of capturing photos for posterity, I also wanted to share a find from our 1990 Topps Partial Blackless Facebook group. Member Mark discovered this partial blackless Darrin Jackson that, against all odds, had been re-issued by Topps in their 2017 Rediscover Topps inserts. It's really quite incredible that it exists, and makes you wonder where they got it and why they had it.
If this was old Topps stock it becomes quite an interesting story about how Topps came by it. If it is a buyback, then it is just insane chance that it happened. The odds are astronomical to find these.
How astronomical? I would guess there was a 1990 Topps print run of 10 million per card. This is based on industry publication estimates of 80 billion sports cards printed per year as well as their stated print run of 6.8 million when they sent out 1991 Topps Desert Shield to the troops. Topps often understated/outright lied about production numbers.
Assuming the 10 million number and a NNOF press run estimated at time of printing around 600, if you were searching through a stack of ONLY #414 Frank Thomas singles for a NNOF, you would have to sort through a 24' tall tower of cards to get one NNOF. If searching ALL '90 Topps cards (not just Frank Thomas singles) for a NNOF, the stack of cards would reach 19,000 ft, roughly the height of Mt Kilimanjaro.
Regardless of how it happened, it was pretty crazy that Topps re-issued a blackless Jackson, and in doing so they created a very interesting 1/1 card for one of our members to own.
@West22 said:
Nice article! And very interesting read. That yellow back Thomas is interesting. It looks legit. I wish I had something to add, but there aren't any other variants on the regular Thomas #414B I am aware of.
On the NNOF #414A, there are a couple variants that are interesting. I am at risk of repeating myself but since many pictures from old posts have been lost to time or were improperly archived, I'd like to get the pics back up. One example that came up for sale quite a few years ago was a NNOF that had a faded shadow of his name. I don't believe it sold at the asking price at the time which was $10K.
As many have said before, someone was clearly asleep at the wheel to let an error as large as the NNOF get out into packs, so it is no surprise that other printing mistakes occurred at a factory running 6 presses at a time, 24 hours a day.
This rubber blanket misprint is really interesting. Do you mind if I add it to the article? Would like me to credit you for it?
Wow! That's a sharp looking NNOF. It's been very fun reading and learning about these blackless errors. PSA has graded 300 of the NNOF Thomas, and if Topps' production was 10 mil of each card, then these cards are truly rare. It's awesome to see these still being pack pulled 35+ years later.
Adam buying O-Pee-Chee (OPC) baseball cards also collecting US & Canadian silver coins
Between Topps, Donruss, and Upper Deck there was definitely something in the water in 1990 to create a nearly countless supply of recurring print defects. Someone needs to do a deep dive on 1990 Fleer. I'm doing all I can with Donruss.
Just what I know at the moment, respecting the owner’s privacy if he feels he wants to share more:
-pulled from a wax pack.
-From a group of 6-7 boxes that also yielded another NNOF and 10 other blackless to a different collector.
There are no boxes left for sale from the source.
All the errors from our friend on the Facebook group:
Another lot of errors from a different collector who also found some of the error boxes:
Back pic of the NNOF, similar to the Dmitri Young PSA 10:
It makes me wonder if these errors came from a similar packout that produced the Dmitri Young PSA 10, since it has the smearing and admittedly, the current 1/1 PSA 10 is one of the best centered examples out there (despite noticeable other flaws)
The centering on both NNOFs looks insane and certainly candidates for PSA 9 if not higher. One of the wildest finds of all time and I wonder if it will ever be topped.
@West22 said:
Just what I know at the moment, respecting the owner’s privacy if he feels he wants to share more:
-pulled from a wax pack.
-From a group of 6-7 boxes that also yielded another NNOF and 10 other blackless to a different collector.
There are no boxes left for sale from the source.
All the errors from our friend on the Facebook group:
Another lot of errors from a different collector who also found some of the error boxes:
Back pic of the NNOF, similar to the Dmitri Young PSA 10:
It makes me wonder if these errors came from a similar packout that produced the Dmitri Young PSA 10, since it has the smearing and admittedly, the current 1/1 PSA 10 is one of the best centered examples out there (despite noticeable other flaws)
The centering on both NNOFs looks insane and certainly candidates for PSA 9 if not higher. One of the wildest finds of all time and I wonder if it will ever be topped.
I am sad that the newly pulled NNOF has that smearing on the back. it is such a nice looking card otherwise. Like the Dmitry Young example, my eye is just pulled to the back and that ugly smearing.
I agree though, that is a FANTASTIC pull and story. It is a dream of mine to pull a NNOF from a pack.
I think your hypothesis may have legs, about the Young PSA 10 and the better centered ones all having the smear. perhaps they did come from the same packout? there is always mystery surrounding that card!
I have looked through this post at the known and accepted ones. For the sheet that they were found on, is there a possibility that others could be found or accepted? I assume one of the graders would look at a submission and weigh if this is indeed a new partial blackless and not some random speck or printer error.
Has anyone tried to submit something they felt was a new partial blackless, of another player not on the list?
If you submit for one of the known ones, is there some criteria they look for to accept it?
Comments
thank you. I always have considered Ross to be a good guy.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
My mistake i did not go back to first post
Apologies on that
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
I thought this scammer was the first post.. mea culpa
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
No worries and I appreciate you following up. Would you mind just editing your original post so we can carry on? Thank you.
One sec
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
No harm done in either direction here, just a misunderstanding.
And also, to add, it’s an understandable mistake you made. Not everyone remembers that the thread is 28 pages and 16 years long!
Redacted all hope u will do same
It's the singer not the song - Peter Townshend (1972)
Not even a minute do I buy the whole buh buh buh I'm a man-child japery - Me (2025)
Thank you for hopping in here and reading my novel!
I did get very lucky. The seller was top notch and a man of his word. Obviously there would be other offers, and possibly someone could have offered to go over the asking price. The card listed on a Saturday, and when I got ahold of him on Monday morning, the seller mentioned he'd had a few messages about it but no serious offers. I think if he had been located in a more populated area in southern Maine it would have sold the first weekend and I would not have gotten it. My marketplace filter is set up to generally only show listings 100 miles from me, and Houlton is 120 miles north of Bangor and 250 miles from Portland.
The icing on the cake was the interesting story behind it and the fact that it was pulled from a 106 card Jumbo Pak, which I had never heard of occurring before. It was all very exciting and also a relief to finally get it in hand. Thank you very much for all the encouragement to get it done. I owe you one!
Just finished up an article on junkwaxgems looking at the various other types of 1990 Topps Thomas misprints.
For those interested
If anyone has other Thomas misprints to add, please let me know here or email me at jacksoncoupage@yahoo.com. I'd love to fatten the article with additional info if it exists.
Edit: just realized that I did not include the very plentiful blank front Thomas and not sure if I will update.
Nice article! And very interesting read. That yellow back Thomas is interesting. It looks legit. I wish I had something to add, but there aren't any other variants on the regular Thomas #414B I am aware of.
On the NNOF #414A, there are a couple variants that are interesting. I am at risk of repeating myself but since many pictures from old posts have been lost to time or were improperly archived, I'd like to get the pics back up. One example that came up for sale quite a few years ago was a NNOF that had a faded shadow of his name. I don't believe it sold at the asking price at the time which was $10K.
Another print defect unique to the NNOFs is they all have some level of deterioration in the black ink above the "T" in "White Sox", ranging from none, to small areas of blackless, to a full border break well outside of the original blackless swath.
Consider, in order: a well printed NNOF, small amount of blackless in team name, then two examples of border breaks:
In the last example of the four above, the one on the bottom right, I have noticed this phenomenon of debris embedded on several blackless cards as well as other orange sheet cards from the NNOF print run. When looking at scanned copies under extreme magnification it shows that the debris embedded on the cards occurred on only the black printing plate/ rubber blanket, and then was dragged through the press leaving black ink in the affected areas (no other ink color was dragged by the debris). All of the printing experts consulted do not believe anything physical on the presses could have caused this error, so I must defer to them and say that it is likely only coincidental that these blackless cards show physical damage on only the black inked areas. I have seen this on a half dozen or so orange sheet cards from NNOF packs and boxes, and it is seen fairly clearly here on my partial blackless #728 Jim Acker:
As many have said before, someone was clearly asleep at the wheel to let an error as large as the NNOF get out into packs, so it is no surprise that other printing mistakes occurred at a factory running 6 presses at a time, 24 hours a day.
On the subject of capturing photos for posterity, I also wanted to share a find from our 1990 Topps Partial Blackless Facebook group. Member Mark discovered this partial blackless Darrin Jackson that, against all odds, had been re-issued by Topps in their 2017 Rediscover Topps inserts. It's really quite incredible that it exists, and makes you wonder where they got it and why they had it.
If this was old Topps stock it becomes quite an interesting story about how Topps came by it. If it is a buyback, then it is just insane chance that it happened. The odds are astronomical to find these.
How astronomical? I would guess there was a 1990 Topps print run of 10 million per card. This is based on industry publication estimates of 80 billion sports cards printed per year as well as their stated print run of 6.8 million when they sent out 1991 Topps Desert Shield to the troops. Topps often understated/outright lied about production numbers.
Assuming the 10 million number and a NNOF press run estimated at time of printing around 600, if you were searching through a stack of ONLY #414 Frank Thomas singles for a NNOF, you would have to sort through a 24' tall tower of cards to get one NNOF. If searching ALL '90 Topps cards (not just Frank Thomas singles) for a NNOF, the stack of cards would reach 19,000 ft, roughly the height of Mt Kilimanjaro.
Regardless of how it happened, it was pretty crazy that Topps re-issued a blackless Jackson, and in doing so they created a very interesting 1/1 card for one of our members to own.
This rubber blanket misprint is really interesting. Do you mind if I add it to the article? Would like me to credit you for it?
Of course! And no I do not need credit.
One of our members over on our Facebook group “1990 Topps Partial Blackless” just pulled a NNOF and 5 other errors from a box.
The NNOF has the nicest centering I’ve ever seen. I don’t have a great pic at the moment.
Link to post
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/14Z9weZVh85/?
Wow! That's a sharp looking NNOF. It's been very fun reading and learning about these blackless errors. PSA has graded 300 of the NNOF Thomas, and if Topps' production was 10 mil of each card, then these cards are truly rare. It's awesome to see these still being pack pulled 35+ years later.
buying O-Pee-Chee (OPC) baseball cards
also collecting US & Canadian silver coins
wow, that is GREAT centering!!! the best i have ever seen. those are almost always off top to bottom
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
What type of pack was it pulled from?
Am curious if it was a single pack purchase from an opened box or buyer purchased a box or multiple boxes.
Between Topps, Donruss, and Upper Deck there was definitely something in the water in 1990 to create a nearly countless supply of recurring print defects. Someone needs to do a deep dive on 1990 Fleer. I'm doing all I can with Donruss.
Arthur
Just what I know at the moment, respecting the owner’s privacy if he feels he wants to share more:
-pulled from a wax pack.
-From a group of 6-7 boxes that also yielded another NNOF and 10 other blackless to a different collector.
There are no boxes left for sale from the source.
All the errors from our friend on the Facebook group:
Another lot of errors from a different collector who also found some of the error boxes:
Back pic of the NNOF, similar to the Dmitri Young PSA 10:
It makes me wonder if these errors came from a similar packout that produced the Dmitri Young PSA 10, since it has the smearing and admittedly, the current 1/1 PSA 10 is one of the best centered examples out there (despite noticeable other flaws)
The centering on both NNOFs looks insane and certainly candidates for PSA 9 if not higher. One of the wildest finds of all time and I wonder if it will ever be topped.
I am sad that the newly pulled NNOF has that smearing on the back. it is such a nice looking card otherwise. Like the Dmitry Young example, my eye is just pulled to the back and that ugly smearing.
I agree though, that is a FANTASTIC pull and story. It is a dream of mine to pull a NNOF from a pack.
I think your hypothesis may have legs, about the Young PSA 10 and the better centered ones all having the smear. perhaps they did come from the same packout? there is always mystery surrounding that card!
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I have looked through this post at the known and accepted ones. For the sheet that they were found on, is there a possibility that others could be found or accepted? I assume one of the graders would look at a submission and weigh if this is indeed a new partial blackless and not some random speck or printer error.
Has anyone tried to submit something they felt was a new partial blackless, of another player not on the list?
If you submit for one of the known ones, is there some criteria they look for to accept it?