1959 Topps Dodgers Team variation

[4reals]

Because of my interest in variations I was recently pointed in the direction of Richard Dingman's list compiled on his personal site: https://sites.google.com/site/richarddingmancards/home

Most of the variations I was already aware of, a couple new ones were exciting to find, and only a single one left me scratching my head.

He lists the 1959 Topps Dodgers Team Card #457 as having two variations. On the back checklist, every example I've seen lists #482 as R. Meyer. Richard claims a second variation exists which lists #482 as Art Houtteman. I have never seen nor heard of this variation before.

I contacted Richard to get some insight but he says he has never seen one and has been looking. He says that he doesn't recall where he heard it but that it was a while ago and that it was from a trusted source.

It's hard to prove something doesn't exist, right? You just have to hope someone finds one to confirm the claim. Can anyone else shed light on this possible variation?

[pclpads]

Joe - if that variation even exists, it would be another major flub by Topps. Houtteman last appeared in a MLB game in Sept. '57, two years B4 the '59T Dodgers checklist was distributed. He bounced around the minors thru '59, notably with Portland of the PCL, but never again pitched in the majors.

[bnorth]

Joe - if that variation even exists, it would be another major flub by Topps. Houtteman last appeared in a MLB game in Sept. '57, two years B4 the '59T Dodgers checklist was distributed. He bounced around the minors thru '59, notably with Portland of the PCL, but never again pitched in the majors.

^This^ and he never played for the Dodgers.

[grainsley]

I have probably checked over 100 Dodger team cards for it, negative result, so if it really does exist it is likely fairly scarce. I have my doubts. It is listed on the Yahoo Group card variations page, but it doesn't say who confirmed actually seeing one.

[4reals]

^This^ and he never played for the Dodgers.

The checklist isn't limited to the Dodgers team, it is part of the complete set listed on the back of the Dodgers Team card. But I agree, with that added info it would be a MAJOR flub considering he wasn't even in the set, or the Majors for that matter.

[ALR-bishop]

I am aware it is on Richard's list. I have never seen one or know of anyone who has. If one existed I believe it would be front and center in the Hobby by now. Just like I think if any 1958 Toops # 145 Ed Bouchee cards* existed they would have surfaced by now.

* Bouche is listed as card #145 in on the Washington Senators checklist card in that set, but #145 is blank in later checklists in the set. The card, if it ever existed, or planned card was pulled from production due to Mr Bouchee's legal difficulties and suspension from baseball.

Houtteman may be hanging out with Roy Sievers' 1962 Topps stamp variation

[SMPEP]

I've also checked hundreds on 1959 Dodgers carsd and have never seen one.

If it exists, it is a very rare error. (Rarer than the Campos Black star, Bakep, etc.)

I vote that it does not exist.

Cheers,
patrick

[Rich Klein]

I think there is also the rumour that there is a "no trade" variation on the Bill White Rookie Card as well. On that one, which I believe has never been proven either, supposedly the source was Larry Fritsch, but without any further proof, no one has ever verified that card. I'd love to see one

Rich

[ALR-bishop]

Yes, Rich, that's another great hobby legend

[4reals]

grainsley, smpep, thanks for looking!

[David W]

You just know that if it exists, someone will have it in a dollar box at a show, or put it on Ebay with no back scan and someone will get it for $2.99 delivered......

[ALR-bishop]

They are the toughest to run down. When trying to find the 3 59 Spahn DOBs and the 3 59 Sullivan copyrights it was a battle between no back scans and sellers unfamiliar with the differences that made it tough ( and there are virtually no shows or shops in south Texas).

Another tough one to run down was the 1967 CL 2, card 107, which can be found with card 107 as D. McCauliffe or Di or D. Virtually every seller, and PSA, will describe the Di as no period instead of D -smudged period