Showing posts with label 1967 Topps Baseball High Numbers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1967 Topps Baseball High Numbers. Show all posts

Saturday, July 2, 2022

Highly Logical Outcome

As promised last time out, today we look at the press sheet array of the 1967 Topps Baseball high numbers.  This series set me on a path of unswerving nerdiness almost 40 years ago as I attempted to decipher a grainy photo of an uncut sheet and correlate it with the price guide short print designations of the day.  It would be many years before I realized Topps used a two slit (or sheet) press sheet encompassing 264 cards, with 132 cards per slit in a standard sized card array, 12 rows of 11 cards per slit.  132 card slits are called uncut sheets in the hobby, which is correct but doesn't account for all 264 cards, which I refer to as a press sheet. Within these parameters, cards sometimes became short or over printed as Topps changed the arrays from one slit to the other.

Why this happened is open to speculation but by the time 1967 rolled around I don't believe it was done to entice the kids to buy more cards looking for subjects that were suppressed in production. Rather, I think it had something to do with how they filled their various packaging configurations, at least in theory. Plus, I'd wager Topps really didn't want a lot of overstock or returns of the high numbers.

Many of the old price guide SP and DP notations were based upon the "tabulation" method where cards were observed as packs or vending boxes and cases were opened.  Depending upon the sample size, this was either accurate, or not.  I believe the idea of the 1967 Brooks Robinson high number card (#600) being super short printed - an idea which still somewhat persists to this day despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary - was due to the tabulation of a single 500 count vending box's contents.  

Well, there is still a wild card in the mix, which is a row or card's position in a sheet.  Corner cards,  those in bottom rows (but not necessarily tops) and the occasional random spot on the sheet do seem to have distribution issues sometimes and the 1967 high numbers are certainly affected by this. Topps must have had a way to segregate and pull certain cards, something that they had been able to do since at least the early 1950's, when various disputed player contracts with Bowman caused certain cards to be pulled due to court orders.

Putting that random production method issue aside for the moment, when this two slit brainstorm finally took hold, I searched for the second 1967 high number uncut sheet .  And I searched and I searched and I searched. Every example I found just showed the same sheet I had already deciphered as a young buck, like so:


It's an old scan but the basic row setup, with each letter representing a row and with the first, or head,  card in each identified, is:

A     Pinson

B    Ferrara

C    NL Rookies

D    Colavito

E    7th Series Checklist

A    Pinson

F    Red Sox Rookies

G    Orioles Rookies

B    Ferrara

C    NL Rookies

D    Colavito

E    7th Series Checklist

Then one day, over ten years ago, Friend o'the Archive Keith Olbermann sent along a partial section of a sheet with a different array-huzzah!  You can tell it's taken from the top left corner of an uncut slit:


That A row headed by Pinson is a match to the top of the other sheet but then the array changes.  So now we have a sheet that goes:

A    Pinson

F    Red Sox Rookies

A    Pinson

So a little odd but not 100% unexpected as the semi's seem to feature a 44x3 and 33x4 array and those Pinson rows get us to four. What to do now?

Well, I did an eBay count a couple of years ago and got this average count per row over 2,539 cards, with an overall average of 33 cards per subject:

A    77    Pinson

B    22    Ferrara

C    25    NL Rookies

D    22    Colavito

E    29    7th Series Checklist

F    34    Red Sox Rookies

G    26    Orioles Rookies

Row E has a slightly higher skew due having Brooks Robinson, a popular slabbing subject, in it and the checklist also being printed with the semi-highs (#531) but that Pinson row is such an outlier.  So where does this lead us? Well I thought here, using this pattern for the "other" sheet:

A    Pinson

F    Red Sox Rookies

A    Pinson

F    Red Sox Rookies

G    Orioles Rookies

B    Ferrara

C    NL Rookies

D    Colavito

E    7th Series Checklist

A    Pinson

F    Red Sox Rookies

Orioles Rookies


Or:

Five impressions:

A    Pinson

Four impressions:

F    Red Sox Rookies

Three impressions:

B    Ferrara

C    NL Rookies

D    Colavito

E    7th Series Checklist (contain Brooks Robinson)

G    Orioles Rookies  (contains Seaver Rookie)

But when you look at the PSA pops (from June 17, which total 42,165) it smooths out, just like with the semi's.  I'll save you all the math but when you factor out Hall-of-Famers, the Robinson and some other more widely collected cards, you get an average count per card of 405.  These are the per row averages using PSA's figures:

A    450

B    382

C    393

D    412

E    397

F    414

G    390

Ferrara is the lowest pop card at 293 and the White Sox Team is the highest at 530, factoring out all the "popular" cards but there is no discernable pattern, it's totally random.  The lowest pops are all over the place, as are the highest ones. The Seaver rookie leads the way among the glitterati, as you might expect, with 3,540 slaberoni's. Maybe the Ferrara was prone to damage or it's just not a card that's graded a lot, possibly due to centering issues. It occurs to me a production issue midway through printing could have occurred, requiring a quick fix of some rows on one of the slits, but good luck figuring that out if it even happened.

I once correlated the known SP and DP information as of December 2011 in a post and came up with 11 cards that didn't quite jibe among my source materials (i.e one source having an SP designation for cards from a specific row while another having the row as being full of DP's); all 11 cards that eneded up without overlapping SP/DP info were in the G Row. I still can't explain why the cards in this row caused set collectors the most reported difficulty (not counting the expensive Seaver card) other than confirmation bias playing a part, nor can I explain the relatively high A Row count, which is two standard deviations away from the mean where none of the other rows are more than one standard deviation away, although B is close on the short side and has the the lowest overall pop count average per PSA!

Summing up, the eBay dataset I used a decade ago was probably not robust enough. The PSA data suggest to me that rows A, D & F were printed 4x each and rows B,C, E & G were printed 3x each across the full 264 card press sheet, although A appears to be a bit of an outlier still (5% chance that it's random).  But it's not a guarantee and there could still be a 5x row, a 4x row and five 3x rows but there's too much noise I think to dissect this any further with the data at hand. I will say whatever old SP and DP data certain guides had in the past seem to be have been based upon incomplete information at the time. And it just feels like that Pinson "A" row is a fiver!

Saturday, June 25, 2022

Short Sighted

There's been several concerted efforts these past two or three years by some intrepid researchers over at Net54 Baseball trying to piece together various uncut sheets arrays for Topps series' where short prints either reside or are thought to.  I chime in on these threads sometimes and there's been some impressive debunking of various SP and DP theories as a result of a kind of crowdsourced look at miscuts and sheet remnants.  Since my interest in off-the-beaten-path Topps stuff started with trying to decipher the 1967 high number SP's four decades(!) ago, I love following these discussions.

The 1967 highs have been pretty much put to rest in terms of SP and DP rows and I'll get into that next time out as I've not posted anything on what I hope and believe are the final findings, but today I want to look at the 1967 semi-highs.  These span nos. 458 to 533 and include eight Hall-of-Famers. Like the high numbers in 1967, it's a 77 card series, which seems to be a magic number for Topps tomfoolery. Of particular note is the long held impression in the hobby that card #476 of Tony Perez was short printed, often the only one from the series identified as such in the guides.  A single SP in a full series is a rare thing with Topps and it implies the "broke the pattern" for some reason.  Before eBay and the internet, it was hard to prove or disprove such things.  Not so anymore.

You can pretty much assume, with a couple of exceptions, that any standard sized Baseball sets (2 1/2" x 3 1/2")  issued by Topps in series will not have short or double prints if the series count was 66 or 88.  The former gives you four impressions of each subject across a full 264 card uncut sheet, the latter three. Outside of those two, the only other series that is an even number is 110 , which Topps used to lead off the first every year from 1958-69, although once they started printing checklists as discrete cards (1961), those series run only 109 cards, with a preview checklist covering the next series tipped in. Those generally result in 44 (or 43 with the extra checklist added) over prints (vs. a more unwieldy-to-describe 88 - or 87 - short prints) in the series as the first wave in most years was produced in massive quantities, which seems to smooth out the press run.  Rule of thumb: if it's not detectable in the pricing, then there aren't short prints in the abstract sense, as there were too many cards produced in the series to matter.

The odd number series are where all the fun is, especially those that are 77 (76) in number.  55 subject series tend to be like the 110's in that they produce over prints.  There's only one 99 card series (the 4th in 1969) and then we get into the 1970-72 era, which had 132 card first series runs.  There's an anomalous 121 card series (the 5th) in 1971 plus the drawdown from 7 to 6 series in 1971 & 1972, before the bottom dropped out in 1973 with a mere 5 series as Topps went over to issuing all cards at once, although there is certainly some SP-DP fun thereafter. So we get some good, old-fashioned variety!

So here are the 77 card (76 in all cases) series:

1961 5th

1961 6th

1962 5th

1962 6th

1962 7th

1963 5th

1964 5th

1964 6th

1965 5th

1965 6th

1965 7th

1966 5th

1966 6th

1966 7th

1967 6th

1967 7th

1968 6th

1969 6th

1969 7th

That's 20 distinct 77 card series!  I'll try not to step on all the work done over at Net54 so am limiting the discussion here to 1967.  I ran the semi-highs through an eBay search on June 13th and came up with this:





















































I designated the two World Series teams from 1967 (Cardinals and Red Sox), Hall-of Famers and Yankees to make sure to weed them out if they had weirdly high counts.  I wanted to see if the semi-highs were as strange as the highs when it comes to double printed and short printed rows.

It sure seems like the Coombs, McFarlane, Dodgers Team, Rigney, Hicks and Martinez should be in a "super print" row based on eBay's listings, while Palmer as a HOF skews some numbers in the Merritt/Santiago row it's been determined he resides in.  Palmer is really popular to grade for some reason and I don't think there is a true super-print row in the semi's based on his positioning and counts I will show below.  I still suspect the 67 highs had a production issue that really changed two planned row counts but believe the semi's were not similarly affected. I say this because of the PSA populations.

If you take the HOF'ers out for a minute, the top 11 counts from eBay are (with eBay to the left, PSA pops to the right):

Coombs 106 - 199

McFarlane 105 - 295

Dodgers Team 101 - 523

Rigney 94 - 230

Hicks 91 - 245

Martinez 89 - 276

Senators Rookies 80 - 260

Landis 80 - 303

Bowens 72 - 259

Wert 70 - 253

Davidson 61 - 237

The Dodgers Team probably skews high due to Koufax being in the team picture. 


But based upon research over at Net54baseball.com Hicks (91 eBay hits) is in a row with Menke (60) and Talbot (50), whose PSA pops are: 245, 253 and 279 respectively.  That is a major eBay disparity on Hicks, like Palmer.  Maybe there's commons that are so lowly literally nobody buys them?

Conversely, the lowest 11 counts are, with PSA pops to the right:

Twins Rookies 15 - 235

Arrigo 16 - 227

Stephenson 17 - 265

Cloninger 18-235

Clemens 19 - 227

Humphreys 21 - 225

Lachemann 21 - 194

Campbell 22 - 194

Braves Team 22 -251

Pirates Rookies 22 - 196

Houk 22-317

I think this relative smoothness among the two sets of counts means that 33 x 4 and 44 x 3 is the likely row setup for the semi's then over the 264 card press sheet array.  Nothing really jumps out when you look at PSA's figures.

Saturday, August 22, 2020

We're Only In It For the Money

Back at it kids-today we pick up the scarce series pricing saga circa 1977 in part two of our ongoing Saturday study. This will be a very TTS-centric post as I only have that publication's run and a clutch of Mike Bondarenko's Baseball Card News (BCNissues at my disposal for the late 70's. In reality, there wasn't much else out there at the time other than Sports Collectors Digest and maybe Sport Fan (which was about to merge with BCN anyway) as other long term hobby periodicals withered away one by one.

February 1977, which brought us an issue of The Trader Speaks that I think was a special giveaway given how many copies of it I've seen and owned over the years, has a Jack Wallin ad that priced 1952 Topps cards like so:

#1-80        75 cents
#81-250    50 cents
#251-310  $1.00

No highs though, rats! Things would pick up quickly though on the 52 highs (and a lot of others) and it was all due to a name we still know today, Dr. James Beckett.

Beckett had a survey form appear in the centerfold of the January TTS (he had solicited this information in other 'zines as well and at various collector conventions) and the results, which also included tabulation from collector mailings, appeared in the April and May issues.  It's the April results that are of interest here (VG-EX pricing was the standard condition across the entire survey):


Given the lack of prior scarce series pricing information for most Topps sets in TTS ads and elsewhere, earlier Beckett results from the collector mailings and convention must have informed some of the survey questions. Note too the continuance of the error involving the fourth 1952 series ending at #252!

The above results have the first indications I can trace of widespread diverging series pricing for Topps Baseball. It's certainly the first mention of the 1966 and '67 highs I can find. This also appears to be the very beginning of specific series pricing tranches, which would wax, then wane (except for the truly tough ones) somewhat over the ensuing forty-plus years. While we now know the 1968 and 1969 sets had differing degrees of high number difficulty (the former being slightly tough, the latter not really with the customary pullback not affecting the last series too much) and the 1970-72 highs are a fair bit harder than say the 68's, the demand had not yet outstripped the available supply.  Indeed there are multiple ads in most 1977 TTS issues offering vending boxes and cases from those years and I suspect Topps was clearing out warehouse space in Duryea at the time.

April and May TTS issues also brought forth, in apparent arrangement with CCC, Don Lepore ads selling 500 count 1967 vending boxes for $20, with 100 highs, presumably still from vending, going for $20, a 5 X premium that roughly mirrored the Beckett results. I will also say the 1957 scarce 4th series and 1967 high number pricing seems to have been a bit ahead of Beckett's findings from the ads I've seen in these two "results" issues.  And I mean by maybe another 25-30% for the 57's and 50-60% for the 67's.  20 and 10 year anniversaries may have played into that, not sure, but both set's high numbers seemed to be having a hobby moment at the time.

Baseball Card News, in their July 4, 1977 issue, had an ad from Chicago's Sports Collectors Store with 1972 highs priced at 15 cents apiece, vs. a lowly 6 cents for anything below the last series. This issue also featured a Don Lepore ad with 12,000 card cases of 1969, 1970 and 1971, series not indicated but clearly not highs at those prices. The 1967 highs he had offered only six weeks or so prior were nowhere to be found.

In August of 1977, Card Collectors Company ran an ad in The Trader Speaks offering the 1972 high numbers in bulk. 1,000 assorted for $120 or you could nail 10,000 assorted for only $900, so clearly there were large amounts of vending still out there. And then this dropped the next month, which after noting on the first page (not shown here but which consisted, I am not kidding, mostly of 1951 Red Back cards) that they had received a "great response" to the August ad, presented the following for sale:


OK, so clearly some massive amount of old Topps inventory popped up at the CCC, supporting my warehouse dumping theory.  No 1963, 1964 or 1966 vending cases in the run from 1962 but those high numbers at 5,000 cards per batch-ye gods!!

The math works out like so per card (heck, I'll do all the high series calculating for ya) on the 5,000 counts, with low series pricing in parenthesis where possible and factoring in the offered 10% reduction:

1962: 17.55 cents (4.5 cents)
1965: 14.4 cents (just over 3.5 cents)
1967: 14.4 cents
1968: 9 cents (about 2.14 cents)
1969: 9 cents (just under 2 cents)
1970: 4.68 cents
1971: 4.68 cents (just over 1.5 cents)
1972: 6.3 cents (1.35 cents)

And how about some assorted 1970's Basketball or even older Football at a penny a throw-yikes!  CCC would also repeat the case offerings in the next month's issue.This pricing structure really shows high numbers from the 60's and 70's were just starting to gain differential pricing mere months after the first Beckett results were made public.  Coinkidink?

A truncated version of the CCC TTS ad with the same case and large lot pricing ran in the August 1, 1977 BCN and not to be outdone (kidding) John Metzger, Jr. had an ad in the same issue offering the 1972 complete high number series in Ex-Mt  for $21, or a hair under 16 cents a card. There was clearly ample unopened product floating around.

A buy ad from Tony Spaneo in the October TTS offered $6 each for 1952 highs (commons) and $75 for the Mantle, all in Ex-Mt.  Dickey and Mathews were worth $25 and Jackie Robinson and Campanella $20, so the Mantle pricing had clearly eclipsed other '52 HOF highs as the World Series approached. Bad timing for Mr. Spaneo though as Lew Lipset was offering $10 for common 1952 highs and $35 for the Campy in the same issue.

Fast forward to The Trader Speaks in December of '77 and Lew Lipset himself reported some auction results from a couple of competitors.  1952 highs in roughly VG-EX were described as bringing "$14-$15 each. It's worth noting that what we now know as the Philly Show had about 4,700 attendees at their September offering, which was a tremendously huge amount for the time. TTS offered their own price guide as part of their "Checklist" book as 1977 ended, which added to the data collectors and dealers could also glean from The Sports Collectors Bible (2nd edition, also issued at year's end) and the Stirling Sports Card Catalog, which had been available since July-things were really starting to hop!

February (and March) 1978  brought remnants of the great high number case sale from the Card Collectors Company in TTS (and more indications of their somewhat infamous 1975 warehouse fire):


In addition to losing the 10% discount, note that full cases of high numbers for most years between 1962 and 1972 had dissipated, leaving only the 1,000 count offers, some of which had their pricing adjusted nominally (except for 1962 highs which had jumped almost 40% with the prior discount gone). Some low number cases had also seen their last at CCC. I have to think most cases had been sold to dealers as the pricing and volume was pretty robust for the time, even given what incredible bargains these lots were then. Indeed, some non-high number cases showed up in a Don Lepore ad a couple of months earlier.

February also brought another Lew Lipset price report on 1952 high numbers, as follows:

VG: $15-$18
EX: $16-$22

The April '78 issue of TTS had some sad news to share, namely the death of Woody Gelman (which occurred on February 9th), which would lead to a profound change at the Card Collectors Company not long after, although he had been steadily stepping back from his company.  The same issue also brought the results of the 2nd Beckett price survey and if it feels like a torch had been passed, I could not disagree. VG-EX price results for the five scarce series being tracked as part of this series on the blog were as follows:

1952: roughly 10% increases to the low series cards (still going #1-252 for the first four though), highs had gone up $2 to $10 from the year prior.

1957: roughly 10% increases as well for all but the tough 4th series, which went up from 49 cents to 58 cents.

1966: lows had no change but the highs went from 23 cents to 27 cents, which would surpass the 67's for the first time that I can find.

1967: lows unchanged, highs actually down 3 cents from 1977's .28 - don't forget there were no 1966 high numbers offered in the Card Collectors blowout ads over the prior year or so, but they had 67's.

1972: lows still at four cents (as were all cards in the first survey) but highs were broken out now at 12 cents each.

Beckett noted 343 collectors had responded to the 1977 survey, with 201 providing updates for this one. Also of note in this issue, Lew Lipset offering $15 for Ex-Mt 1952 highs.

May brought another Card Collectors Co. ad to TTS:


Following a nice but brief tribute to Woody Gelman, we can see only scant remains of the high number vending case hoard were still on hand with pricing remaining almost static.

You want the skinny on the Mick?  You got him, courtesy of Lew Lipset in the June TTS, where tracked several recent sales of 1952's #311:
  • $230 - high bid (scrape on border noted)
  • $245 - high bid (VG)
  • $200 - St. Louis Convention ("less than excellent")
  • $365 - Lew says April 1978 TTS auction but I can't find the ad (condition unknown)
  • $500 - private sale (Ex-Mt)
$500 is the highest price I have seen to this point in time. Also worth noting from this issue-Card Collectors Co. was out of 1967 highs (72's as well). The hobby was really heating up and almost 7,000 people attended the spring Philly show, with 136 dealers there to sell 'em everything they possibly could.

Speaking of Lipset, in the July 1978 TTS, issued in advance of a major convention to be held at Shea Stadium the following month, he was offering $18.50 apiece for the 1952 highs and offering to buy Micks at $250, all in the usual Ex-Mt condition. Then in the August issue (Lew was really starting to monitor prices and he would eventually launch a newsletter that really delved into that subject) he noted an average price of just over $28 for Ex-Mt '52 highs. Meanwhile Card Collectors Co. continued with 12,000 count low number cases in their ad (1968-1976) indicating they were still getting direct feeds from Topps, likely after the respective prior season's returns had come back to home to roost. The highs were down to lots of 100 or 1,000 for 1962, 1965, 1968, 1970 & 1971.

A retrospective in the June 1980 issue of The Trader Speaks indicated a record sale in September of the Mantle at $1,750 while the October TTS brought news in Lipset's column of a pricing frenzy surrounding the 1967 Topps Brooks Robinson card, selling in the $35-$60 dollar range at the time, a huge amount for a late 60's card. Lew correctly pointed out the card was as obtainable as any other in the high numbers but that the pricing was speculative.  I believe the commotion concerned a much publicized vending box or two being opened at a convention (possibly in 1977) and yielding, if memory serves, only a single Brooksie.  Of course this was just a random box with somewhat typical Topps collation but it still throws off the pricing of this card today.

Speaking of 67's, a Card Collectors Co. ad in the same issue offered varying amount of mint highs from 1958-1971 but there were no 1967's to be had.  Don Lepore, though had some: 73 different, all mint, for $50 (68.5 cents each), or 100 assorted with roughly four of each number at 25 cents apiece.  He even had what looks like two vending boxes for $300, or 30 cents a throw. Those 1967 overprints were already worming their way into the hobby! And 1972 highs were 16.5 cents each in bulk.

Meanwhile, Lipset's ad makes it seem like he was holding back his 52 highs (smart man). And what to make of Evans Clagett, offering full cases of all series from 1971-77 Topps, best offer or trade? Clearly you could still buy such cards in bulk but those days were ending.

Lepore had some pricing of interest in his November 1978 TTS ad. 1,000 assorted 1967 highs with good differentiation that worked out to 32.5 cents per card.  If you could handle a little more duplication then it was 25 cents a pop. 1972 highs were up to 17.5 cents apiece if you bought 1,000 at a clip, or you could buy the entire series for $35. Card Collectors Co. had no 67's but 50 1966 highs worked out to 28 cents each. These were all advertised as mint by both dealers.

The TTS holiday issue for 1978 brought readers of The Trader Speaks a truly stupendous ad from the Card Collectors Company. An auction brought forth wonders such as a 1955 Topps Baseball Stamp of Don Mossi (earliest reference to these I've seen), some Rookie Banquet programs and a wrapper for the ridiculously rare 1970 Baseball Booklets standalone issue as Topps tried to recycle the inserts from that year as a test. But mint high numbers in quantity were back! 1968's and 1970-72's were offered at set sale pricing, with 1972 highs fetching the now ubiquitous 17.5 cents each.


And to top it off, a reprint of the 1956 Bowman Baseball designs, which set was aborted once Topps took over that storied subsidiary of Connelly Containers in February 1956, was made available. Oh yeah, Don Lepore had now formally joined forces with Richard Gelman at the CCC-crazy!


Lew Lipset in the same issue was offering EX 1952 Topps highs at $30 per card and he had a range of conditions available as well if you wanted to settle for lesser examples. The thrust of The Trader Speaks ads in general had clearly moved into the Topps and Bowman realms during 1978 and that trend would continue.  Not quite speculation yet but a "buy and hold" environment was developing.

Speaking of Lipset, January of 1979 saw him offering a full high number series of 1952 Topps with a minimum bid of $3,800! He was also selling a lot of fifty one 1957 scarce series cards for $38, or 33 for $25. A Card Collectors Co. ad in the same issue of TTS had many wondrous offerings but I'll stick with 1957 scarce series (50 for $40), 1966 highs (10 for $10) and 1967's (a bargain 50 for only $30), indicating interest in the 66's was taking off.

The March 1979 issue of The Trader Speaks had some interesting ads: an "Ex-Mt w/ staple mark on face" '52 Mantle had a minimum bid of $300 in an auction offered by V.S. Trocino, who looks to have lived quite near Woody Gelman's neighborhood. An unrelated ad in the same issue had 67 highs at $3.50 for ten. April's edition of Lipset's column brought news of an Ex-Mt auction hammer (in February) of $680 on a 1952 Mantle, noted to be a record price. Lipset also penned what I think is the first reference to the now infamous 1952 3rd series gray backs and while those are not our quarry here, it's interesting to note he sources them to Canada, which may or may not have been the case, most likely the latter.

Jumping to May, $1.50 would get you 1957 scarce series commons from The Sports Collectors Store and Tony Galovich, a name familiar to many of us "mature" collectors, was offering $550 for a 52 Mantle in Ex-Mt as the race to four figures and beyond for the hobby's eventual second most iconic card was going full blast.

As for the hobby's most iconic card, George Lyons reported in the same issue of TTS that four collectors had uncovered the five card "proof" strip that contains the T206 Wagner (and seems to have been in the great shortstop's possession when he died). I will note, that while it is irrelevant to my interest in the pricing of Topps cards through the years, this strip is not necessarily a proof but also is not necessarily from a production sheet. (UPDATE 8/25/20-I am advised it is indeed a proof).

Just for fun, here is the strip (note that it seems each card's actual edge can be seen, although lines could have been added by the lithographer to simulate same):


Also very noticeably in this issue (of 80 pages no less), buy and sell ads for wrappers were popping up and reading in hindsight you just get the feeling things were exponentially exploding.  I was only a year and a half or so from re-entering the fray at the time this issue came out but from mid-1977 on the excitement must have been through the (stadium) roof.

The June TTS brought a Lipset ad (5.2 pages no less!) with 66 different 66 highs for....$65 (Lew, that's a whiff!), so essentially $1 apiece.  And in August, amidst an impressive offering of Topps test issues and packs, Card Collectors Co. trotted out a TTS ad with 1966 highs among others. Check it out:


The 66's seem like they came from vending and what's up with that 1965 high number pricing?  So 20 cents each for the 66's, with too much of a range to determine the 67's mint price. The September TTS had some mid-series 57's at $1.25 each, as an upward trend revealed itself. In October Lew Lipset stated that he was "totally convinced" that the scarcity of the 1967 Brook Robinson and all the high numbers that year was a "complete sham" after an $80 minimum bid for one wasn't reached at a Southern California Convention. That same convention saw the 52 Mantle go for $600 in VG-Ex. Then in November Lew reported that common 1952 highs were at $55 apiece!

Want more Lew?  In the December TTS he reported the 1967 Brooks Robinson card was half as available as other high numbers but continued opining the pricing structure of the series was still a sham-go figure! Meanwhile, 1966 highs were almost non-existent in ads and auctions.

The first (dare I say landmark) Sport-Americana Price Guide came out in 1979, authored and compiled by Denny Eckes and Dr. James Beckett. Now referred to as the "Beckett Guide" it was anything but originally as the contributions of Eckes, who owned a large card shop called Den's Collectors Den in Laurel, Maryland which frequently advertised in the major hobby publications, were vital.  Their pricing of the various series and cards we are analyzing here gave us this:

1952 Highs: Mint $34, VG-EX $27. Other commons, depending on series, were between $1.05 and $1.50 in Mint with the Semi-Highs in that grade clocking in at $4.
1952 Mantle: Mint $500, VG-EX $375.
1957 Mids: Mint $1, VG-EX 70 cents. Other commons, depending on series were between 26 and 30 cents in Mint.
1966 Highs:Mint 42 cents and 30 cents in VG-EX vs. 11 cents in Mint for all other commons.
1966 Perry: Mint $3.50, VG-EX $2.50. This was consistent with other Hall of Famers in the high series.
1967 Highs: Mint 46 cents and 33 cents in VG-EX vs. 10 cents in Mint for all other commons.
1967 B. Robinson: Mint $50, VG-EX $40 The most expensive card in the entire set by a factor of 10 (the Seaver Rookie, another denizen of the nosebleed section, was $5 in Mint, Mantle, in a lower series, was $4.50 in that grade).
1972 Highs: Mint 20 cents and 15 cents in VG-EX vs. 8 cents in Mint for all other commons.

Note the spread between VG-EX and Mint was not all that much at this point.

And then, in the January 1980 issue of The Trader Speaks, Dan Dischley started a "Superstar Price Guide" with the idea it would be a recurring feature to keep up with pricing, initially through 1959's issues, since the major guides came out yearly at best. Other publications had sporadically tried to run pricing results but he was a man ahead of his times- we also get to see the 1952 Topps Mantle priced at a very gaudy $2,000 in Ex-Mt!  The 1951 Mantle and Mays cards, together with the '49 Bowman Paige and then 1952 Topps cards of Mathews, Mays Campanella and Jackie Robinson in the $300's, were the next closest superstars to the Mick. The run-up was on!

February was even hotter: $2,250 TTS guide price for the '52 Topps Mick and his high number counterpart Mathews hit $400, as did the Mantle rookie in 1951 Bowman. 1952 Topps highs in general were coming out of the woodwork, no doubt to to the robust valuations being assigned to them. Lew Lipset threw in the towel on his monthly column in light of the TTS price guide this month as well; the hobby was no longer solely in the hands of those who had guided it in the 70's.  "POR" (Price On Request) started appearing in some ads around this time on the hottest of cards.  The 52 Mantle was case #1 in this regard but the '67 Brooks Robinson also got the treatment.

Not everybody was on the POR bandwagon though-Card Collectors Co.. had a 52 Mantle in Mint (yeah, right) condition for a whopping $3,000! They also pulled their Brooks Robinson cards from an individually priced sale of 67 highs, where commons were going for 50 cents each (this steady pricing was seen elsewhere as well).  Meanwhile Hall's Nostalgia had a mint (there's that identifier again) '67 Robinson for $160 and wanted a $2,300 minimum bid for a 1952 Topps Mantle they were auctioning in "solid ex".

March TTS had 1960's Superstar Pricing with Brooks Robinson's 1967 card leading the decade at $125 (again, Ex-Mt).  No mention of the allegedly short-printed 1966 Gaylord Perry card was made though, a signal I've been looking for amidst all the noise. Meanwhile, April brought Superstar Pricing of $2,750 for Mr. Mantle-yikes! It also introduced Common and Rare/Scarce Series pricing: 1952 highs at $65 and 1957 mid's at $1.75. And in a big twist, Card Collectors Co. ran a buy ad, ranging from pre-war to 1973, although mostly they wanted Topps sets from 1957 on; guess all those blowout sales really emptied out the old garage (and probably the Topps warehouse since I think that's where all the full cases got drop shipped from)!  Sample buy prices for 1952 Topps to give you an idea of series breakdowns:

#1-250: $1.25 (fourth series end point is correct!)
#251-310: $4.50
#311-407: 35.00 (he was selling them a month later for $65)
#311 Mantle (Mt): $2,400

The Mantle price was $200 more than the offers for the three "holy grail" 1951 Major League All Star cards of Konstanty, Roberts & Stanky in Ex-Mt.  They are the possibly rarest Topps cards of the era (the "Small" 1955 Hocus Focus highs may be just as tough) so this was a sure sign Mantle's '52 card was galloping away from the pack. In addition TTS weighed in at 100 pages this month, their biggest issue ever and it was stuffed to the rafters with auctions and sales.  The frequency of articles was way down to accommodate all the dealer ads as baseball season got underway.

May started out just as hot, as the 1967 Brooks Robinson was priced at $150 in the Dischley Superstar Matrix and 1966 and '67 highs were priced at $1.25 and $1.50 respectively. Articles started appearing in a much tinier font in this issue than had been used previously. The Trader Speaks had just about maxed out its page count! 1957 scarce series commons made an appearance in ad from Joe Bratony at $2.75 apiece in NM-Mt (an early adopter of this ridiculous grade it seems); another ad toward the back from Mark Angert and Al Entin had 66 highs at 20 for $30, in what looks like average NM condition. Also, plastic sheet pricing wars were breaking out, indicating just how many collectors needed ways to store their cards.

TTS in June had the 1966 Gaylord Perry as a POR along with the 67 B. Robinson in an ad from Bluechip Sportcard. Perry was still very much an active major-leaguer so it doesn't seem like HOF run-up pricing. Generally, 1966 common highs were starting to show up in ads and auctions, bringing about $1.50 vs $1 for the 67's, so maybe the 66's were getting a little more love. A spare $3,250 would get you a NM 1952 Topps Mantle from Jim Cumpton.  I dunno Jim, got a picture? An ad for the first National Sports Collectors Convention reared its head as well.

The Trader Speaks in July brought a massive seven page ad from the Sports Collectors Store and some hints can be found on 1966 and '67 pricing.  A 1966 #598 Perry (anywhere from VG-Mint but "generally" mint) was listed for $15 and the highs were $2 a throw.  1967 brought our old "POR" friend out for #600 B. Robinson and $1.75 a pop for highs. Neither year's high pricing was showing any signs of SP awareness though. 1952 Mantle pricing elsewhere in the issue seemed to be holding steady at $3,250 in Ex-Mt and it's worth noting an absolute riot of 50's and 60's Topps cards being offered throughout the issue in multi-page ads. Also of note, what may have been the first ad from the eventual "King of Commons" Bill Henderson; we'll soon see if he was on top of SP pricing.

As the summer wore on, the Mick gained in stature with $2,500 Superstar pricing in the August TTS (another 100 page issue), although the lower graded Mantles in this issue seemed to be falling behind when accounting for price spreads between grades. The pricing on 1952 high numbers dropped to $60 while 57's remained steady at $1.75 for the scarce series cards. Reverse auctions also popped up in a few ads, indicating maybe some saturation was occurring in the hobby.

Then, the unthinkable happened when the October TTS Superstar Pricing grid (50's and 60's alternated monthly) had the 1952 Mantle nosediving to $1,750! I suspect this was due to a find of several partial 1952 high number sheets that walked into the Baltimore convention in June. 



(excerpts copyright The Sport Americana Baseball Card Price Guide, Number 3, Dr. James Beckett and Dennis W. 
Eckes, 1981, Co-published by Den's Collectors Den, Laurel MD and Edgewater Book Company, Lakewood, OH)

While not fully showing the 100 card array, it was apparently possible to piece enough together to determine cards 311 (Mantle, 312 (Jackie Robinson) and 313 (Bobby Thomson) had been double printed.  I doubt any attention was paid to the idea (then unknown) that a full sheet of 1952's would consist of 200 cards, with each 100 card half (or "slit" in the lithographer's parlance) being what we think of as a traditional uncut sheet then and now. However given the observable differences of these three examples and no others in the series, it seems like the DP designations were correctly assigned 40 years ago.

Elsewhere in that issue Card Collectors Co. offered a complete, mint 4th series from 1957 for $400 as the TTS guide had them up slightly at $2.00 each but downward pricing continued in The Trader Speaks November issue, where the "Grid" had the 1967 Brooks Robinson's reduced to $100:


Those $1.50 prices were the same two months prior as well, when the '66 highs had caught up with the 67's.  And the 1972 nosebleed's (along with the prior two year's) were steady at 25 cents per card, unchanged from their debut pricing in April. In December however, the 1952 Topps Mantle descended even further to a mere $1,450 and '52 highs had shrunk down to $48 in the guide. The landmark 1952 set had overheated! Indeed a VG Mick in one ad was offered at $850 and Bill Henderson had common '52 highs at $5 each, EX or better condition. Dan Dischley himself was offering 1952 high number commons at $40 in mint condition, in a huge conflict of interest! 1957's 4th series continued to increase though, now at $2.25 per card per TTS.

As for the second Sport-Americana Guide, it yielded the following in 1980:

1952 Highs: Mint $55, VG-EX $44. Other commons, depending on series, were between $2 and $2.50 in Mint with the Semi-Highs in that grade clocking in at $8.25.
1952 Mantle: Mint $2,500, VG-EX $1,800.
1957 Mids: Mint $1.80, VG-EX $1.35 cents. Other commons, depending on series were between 30 and 35 cents in Mint.
1966 Highs:Mint $1.80 and 80 cents in VG-EX vs. 12 cents in Mint for all other commons.
1966 Perry: Mint $10.00, VG-EX $8.00. This was consistent with McCovey in the high series as the other HOF subject, Robin Roberts, had dropped to $6.
1967 Highs: Mint $1.50 and $1.25 cents in VG-EX However, the first appearance of Double Print pricing that I've seen started here, with a notation commons (40 or so identified) only sold at 50 cents apiece in Mint. All other commons were priced at 12 cents in Mint.
1967 B. Robinson: Mint $120, VG-EX $100. The most expensive card in the entire set still but the Seaver Rookie had impressively bounced up to $45 in Mint.
1972 Highs: Mint 22 cents and 16 cents in VG-EX vs. 9 cents in Mint for all other commons, save the Semi-Highs which were 14 cents each in that grade.

This will conclude part two of this series as more and more, pricing was determined by statistical analysis and not "feel" as page counts started to dwindle in The Trader Speaks as 1981 dawned; indeed the dimensions of the magazine itself would shrink radically come July of that year as Sports Collectors Digest and some other "tabloid" publications really came to the fore, not to mention the slick, newstand-worthy Baseball Cards magazine.  Part three will be much more focused on how the monthly and annual price guides started recording and driving prices in the hobby, which very much reflected a rapidly shifting substrate.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Alternate Reality

Well kids, thirty years later a partial solution to the second 1967 baseball high number sheet has been revealed. A Current Friend o'the Archive sent along a partial sheet scan of the top three rows on the alternate sheet.

To refresh your memories, the 12 rows on the known full sheet were printed in this order (SP = Single Print, DP = Double Print):

DP1
DP2
DP3
DP4
DP5
DP1
SP1
SP2
DP2
DP3
DP4
DP5

Given the disconnect between that array and what has been shown in the major price guides as purported double prints, the second sheet has always been the key to determining which numbers were printed more often than the other high numbers.  This new information is not what I expected,as the upper left corner shows:






The top row matches the other sheet (DP1) but the next row is SP1 on the other sheet and it appeared as the seventh row previously.  The real kicker is the DP1 row repeating again so soon.  We get:

DP1
SP1
DP1

That's now four "Pinson rows" over two sheets. Now the question is what do the other nine rows look like on this alternate sheet?  My theory on overall print totals per row over both sheets remains intact but I suspect there is at least one more surprise on that second sheet.  The above sheet is a finished proof by the way, meaning the backs were printed as well.  Finding/figuring the next nine rows could take another thirty years!

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Who Ya Callin' Short?!

The earliest piece of true hobby research I ever pulled off was in the early 1980's, when I sussed out a black & white picture in an old hobby magazine of a 1967 Topps high number sheet.  I did this because the accompanying article mentioned it showed the Brooks Robinson card (at the time thought of as the ne plus ultra of all short prints) as a double print on the sheet.  Well, I thought to myself, that's odd, and then with the help of a magnifying glass and a team checklist book, pieced together all 132 cards on the sheet and then typed it all up (yes, on an ancient device called a typewriter) and tucked my schematic away.  I am glad I did that as I lost the original picture sometime later, although I have since found other examples of it, like so:







































That is described as the "B" sheet, which means it was on the right side of the full 264 card sheet; the "A" sheet would have been to the left, although I think they were actually printed in a horizontal orientation.  Pay attention now, there will be a quiz at the end and you will have to use math! After years of relative stability in their printing patterns, Topps started mucking around with things in 1967 (Edit 5/29/19-looks like starting in 1965). Counting from 1961, the first year of expansion in baseball, their set lengths were 587, 598, 576, 587, 598, 598 again (1966), then 609, before dropping back to 598 in 1968, the final year before another MLB expansion would occur and set sizes would grow beyond anything ever seen before.

Topps also had consistently printed additional cards on each press sheet when compared to the checklist cards in this period, thereby giving the purchaser some cards from the next series plus the checklist card for the following series (in what was technically the prior series pack) and ensnaring their young consumers in a ceaseless march to the last series of the year where the extra cards and checklists would elegantly resolve.  But in 1967 they changed how they did this and also went over the 600 mark for some reason, which is not entirely clear and was not supported by their being more teams or players. The was also a distribution problem with the 1967 high numbers and many locales did not receive them, especially west of the Mississippi River. Add it all up and you have a recipe for scarcity.

Now, getting back to the uncut high number sheet.  While the above scan is truncated at top and bottom, if you count the descending rows and use DP for double print and SP for single print, you can label them as: DP1, DP2, DP3, DP4, DP5, DP1, SP1, SP2, DP2, DP3, DP4, DP5. The odd placement of the two SP rows has always caught my eye and led me to think something was afoot but eventually I forgot about this happenstance.

Well we have to jump ahead a few years, to when I found a list of 1967 high number DP's in The SCD/Standard Catalog of Baseball Cards. They had DP's where I had SP's.  I then checked one of the Beckett books and found their list did not mesh with mine either.  I e-mailed Beckett and got a response that their DP listings had been created by direct observation of a (possibly partial) uncut sheet.  The source of SCD's listing was never revealed to me but it seems now it was based upon tabulation data and not an uncut sheet.  It was clear though that Beckett had access to a sheet that was different than the one I had sketched out.  So I created a spreadsheet to show all the possibilities and came up with something quite interesting:


SUBJECT B SHEET SCD BECKETT
531 7TH SERIES CHECKLIST DP
534 BAUER SP DP DP
535 CLENDENON
536 CUBS ROOKIES (J. NIEKRO)
537 ESTRADA DP DP
538 MARTIN
539 EGAN SP DP DP
540 CASH
541 GIBBON
542 A'S ROOKIES (MONDAY) SP DP DP
543 SCHNEIDER
544 INDIANS TEAM
545 GRANT
546 WOODWARD
547 RED SOX ROOKIES SP DP DP
548 GONZALEZ DP DP
549 SANFORD
550 PINSON DP DP
551 CAMILLI DP DP
552 SAVAGE SP
553 YANKEES ROOKIES SP
554 RODGERS SP DP DP
555 CARDWELL
556 WEIS SP DP DP
557 FERRARA
558 ORIOLES ROOKIES (BELANGER) SP
559 TRACEWSKI DP DP
560 BUNNING
561 ALOMAR
562 BLASS SP DP DP
563 ADCOCK SP
564 ASTROS ROOKIES SP DP DP
565 KRAUSSE
566 GEIGER DP DP
567 HAMILTON (YANKEES)
568 SULLIVAN SP
569 A.L. ROOKIES (CAREW) DP DP
570 WILLS
571 SHERRY
572 DEMETER
573 WHITE SOX TEAM
574 BUCHEK
575 BOSWELL
576 N.L. ROOKIES 
577 SHORT
578 BOCCABELLA
579 HENRY
580 COLAVITO
581 METS ROOKIES (SEAVER) SP
582 OWENS DP DP
583 BARKER (YANKEES)
584 PIERSALL
585 BUNKER
586 JIMENEZ SP
587 N.L. ROOKIES 
588 KLIPPSTEIN SP DP DP
589 RICKETTS DP DP
590 RICHERT
591 CLINE SP
592 N.L. ROOKIES 
593 WESTRUM
594 OSINSKI
595 ROJAS
596 CISCO SP DP DP
597 ABERNATHY SP
598 WHITE SOX ROOKIES
599 DULIBA DP DP
600 B. ROBINSON SP
601 BRYAN SP DP
602 PIZARRO
603 A'S ROOKIES SP
604 RED SOX TEAM
605 SHANNON
606 TAYLOR
607 STANLEY SP
608 CUBS ROOKIES DP DP
609 JOHN





The 7th series checklist also appeared on the 6th series press sheet, so is more abundant in theory than any other 7th series card but we'll treat it as a true high for our exercise here today.  If you look at the data you will see that 11 cards identified as short prints have no corresponding DP designator from either SCD or Beckett.  Logically, these 11 cards are the true 1967 high number short prints and they are all from the row I call SP2:

552 Savage
553 Yankees Rookies
558 Orioles Rookies (Belanger)
563 Adcock
568 Sullivan
581 Mets Rookies (Seaver)
586 Jimenez
591 Cline
597 Abernathy
603 A's Rookies
607 Stanley

Conversely, 11 cards that are in my SP1 row are Double Prints on both the SCD and Beckett lists (I suspect #601 Bryan, a Yankee, was left off the SCD list inadvertently):

534 Bauer
539 Egan
542 A's Rookies (Monday)
547 Red Sox Rookies
554 Rodgers
556 Weis
562 Blass
564 Astros Rookies
588 Klippstein
596 Cisco
601 Bryan

Then there is the curious case of the 11 cards shown as DP's in the other two lists and also on my sheet:

537 Estrada
548 Gonzalez
550 Pinson
551 Camilli
559 Tracewski
566 Geiger
569 AL Rookies (Carew)
582 Owens
589 Ricketts
599 Duliba
608 Cubs Rookies

A nice, neat 11 cards and all appearing in the row I have dubbed DP1. The next three rows (DP2, DP3, DP4) are not designated by either price guide but I have them as DP's.  Beckett, if using a partial sheet, may not have caught these and SCD just doesn't mention them.  I have them all as DP rows in order to make the Beckett sheet work,

Did you notice all three of these "odd" rows (DP1, SP1, DP2) appear as a single grouping on my sheet? Let's replicate them at the top of a theoretical second sheet:

DP1
SP1
SP2

Still, what of Brooks Robinson?




























SCD has him as an SP and the old thoughts on Brooks were based upon a vending box hoard's yield many years ago that was shy on Brooksie's.  If we presume his row (DP5 on my sheet) was not a DP row on the "Beckett" sheet, we can extrapolate the rest of the sheet:

DP2
DP3
DP4
DP5
SP1
DP1
DP2
DP3
DP4

Maybe not in that exact order and not ironclad until the second sheet turns up but the math works. This gives a final tally that you can check yourselves, of:

Rows DP1, DP2, DP3, DP4  = 4 appearances each over two sheets (16/24ths)
Row DP5 =  3 appearances over two sheets (3/24ths)
Row SP1 = 3 appearances over two sheets (3/24ths)
Row SP2 = 2 appearances over two sheets  (2/24ths)


My SP rows would not have been known by Beckett, so there are now 24 rows present and accounted for!  It may be disproven someday but right now I'm sticking with it.  As for the promised quiz-see if you can rearrange the theoretical second sheet to match what Beckett would have seen on a partial while still maintaining consistency with the list of SP's and DP's in the full 7th series list above and then have it prove out over 24 rows.