1951 Topps Blue/Red Backs

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>I just acquired two unopened packs of 1951 Topps Blue backs and a couple of Red backs. I am going to have the packs authenticated/graded by GAI, but I had a couple of questions. First, can you tell the difference between a blue and a red back pack from the color of the wrapping? I think so and that my packs are blue backs because of some blue in the wrapping. The red backs packs I've seen on ebay only have red and green wrapping. <br /><br />And second, one of the cards I got is really the two cards still attached as if they came from the pack. What's the protocol here? Do I separate the cards? I'm inclined not to, but one card is mint and the other has a crease. The bottom would grade a 7 or higher, the top a 4 or lower. Does one submit them attached? What's the story.<br /><br />Any help would be appreciated.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Julie</b><p>...whoops...or maybe you got additional cards? Don't open the packs if you haven't.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jon Canfield</b><p>Im not sure there is a difference but I can tell you this... 10 years ago, I bought an almost full box of Red Backs - about 55 sealed packs, the box, etc. One of the few packs I kept was a Blue Back in a Red Back wrapper. I have had the pack autneticated by GAI. So, I can tell you that I own a blue back pack wrapped completely in a Red Back wrapper...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>Julie, I have not opened the packs. As you guessed I also got a few singles from the same guy.<br /><br />Jon, how do you know you have a blue back in a red wrapper? Wouldn't you have to open the pack to find out?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>canjond</b><p>The blue back shows very easily through the white portions of the wrapper. When I purchased the box at auction, it was listed as "55 unopened red back packs including original box and a blue back pack in a red back wrapper" (or something to that affect). When I received the box, it was easy to find and figured I should pull it aside. That's also why I had GAI grade it... I will scan the pack when I get home from work today.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>I bought a panel years ago by mail order that was supposedly a near mint Kiner-Rosen. Of course, Kiner has a back crease. I have often contemplated separating them but have always opted not to because panels are increasingly hard to find while the regular cards are not. You can always separate them if you like but then you have one nice card and one common condition card. I'd prefer to have the full panel as an oddity. I would like to have the panel slabbed but I don't like the PSA or GAI holders and SGC doesn't do authentic...yet. <br /><br />BTW, the condition of this panel was one of the reasons I stopped buying by mail order until the slabbers came into the picture.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jon Canfield</b><p>As promised, the scan of the Blue Back pack in the Red Back wrapper authenticated by GAI...<br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1104367291.GIF">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>qualitycards.com</b><p>JON - Didn't Topps also use that wrapper for both Blue & Red backs? If so then your wrapper is correct not a variation.<br />In Mark Murphy's pack guide book he shows a wrapper for blue backs thats a "rare variation" his words. Its a red wrapper w/ Baseball & Candy listed on it, and shows a player w/ a bat inside a white diamond. He also shows the standard wrapper that we've all seen and states 1951 Topps Red/Blue back pack. So I always assumed the wrapper that you show has been used for both blue & red packs...QC

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DGT</b><p>Jay.<br />I believe you are refering to the "Baseball Candy"<br />wrapper that is yellow and is what the panels of both red backs and blue backs were issued in, and they inserted CMAS, Team and MLAS cards between a pair of red back or blue back panel "game cards".<br /><br />there is also a really rare rack pack with the board game and complete 52 card deck along with a few "player" cards (Connie Mack or Major League All-stars)<br /><br />I'll post some pics as time/hosting allows.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DD</b><p>Al Rosen in one of his auctions a very long time ago had the greatest unopened item I have ever seen. It was one of the old fashioned Christmas stockings with the netting that contained candy and some small toys. In the one he had, there were unopened packs of 1951 Red Backs, Blue Backs, Connie Mack All Stars, Current All Stars, and Team Cards, along with the candy and toys.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Colt McClelland</b><p>I own quite a few of the Red Back panels, and I would recommend that you keep them together (despite condition issue), as the attached panels are much more scarce than the single Red Back cards. Also, SGC does slab the panels (see scan). Finally, I have also attached a scan of some of the oddball items the others refer to above (the SGC panel is mine, the rest of the items unfortunately are not). You can just make out the sides of the panels in the picture behind the game board. This was apparently a game that went with the red backs, blue backs, and the die cut players in the Major League All-Star and Connie Mack All-Star sets.<br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/cmcclelland/1951toppsredbackpanels/websize/feller-holmes83.jpg"><br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/cmcclelland/1951toppsmajorleagueallstars/websize/51rbgamepack.jpg"><br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/cmcclelland/1951cmas/websize/51CMASwrapper.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>Believe it or not, the 1951 Topps Red Back panels were also issued in red cellophane packaging along with a team card or a Connie Mack all-star.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DGT</b><p>...the cellophane version possibly being a "collectors club" christmas re-packaging or something like that...the guy with the Oregon antique store story had them. (the story where Dad went back to buy up what they had the next day).<br /><br />...but his Babe Ruth cards had creases when I saw them, they seem to have vanished somewhere along the line.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jon Canfield</b><p>To answer your question - I am not sure if the Red Backs and Blue Backs utilized the same wrapper. When I bought my lot of unopened packs, it was advertised as "including 1 Blue Back in a Red Back wrapper". I just kind of assumed this was not the norm.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>Murcerfan,<br /><br />I don't believe so. Nearly all of the cards we've had from the cellophane wrappers were Near Mint to Mint, including the best two graded Ruths in the hobby, a fair number of Near Mint or better team cards, various other high-grade Connie Mack singles and dozens of SGC 88, 92 and 96 quality red back pairs. I also recall that the cellophane wrappers included original verbiage from Topps, indicating that the product was not of aftermarket origin. If I can locate some wrappers, I'll post some images.<br /><br />Edited to add: the largest find of 1951 Topps red back cellos that we know of came directly from a city in Pennsylvania, not Oregon (perhaps we are referring to different types of packaging?)

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>qualitycards.com</b><p>Dave - Below is the rare Blue Back wrapper that I scanned from Mark Murphy's price guide.<br /><br />Jon - GAI in grading/slabbing the pack didn't list it as a Red back pack, so maybe your batch had Red back cards and the lone Blue back pack.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.qualitycards.com/ebay/blueback.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DGT</b><p>....see something new every day (well maybe not each and every day)... did not realize the blues originally came in anything but panels.<br /><br />I never seem able to resist eating up bandwidth:<br /><br /><img src="http://www.sgccardregistry.com/images/cards/Item_264_38667.jpg"><br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>...the Ruths<br /><br /><img src="http://members.aol.com/bmwcards/51ruths.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MW</b><p><i>"I seem to recall...the cellophane version possibly being a "collectors club" christmas re-packaging or something like that..."</i><br /><br /><br />That does not appear to be accurate. See image below. The words on the wrapper read:<br /><br /><b>Front:</b> "16 Official Trading Cards. an educational hobby. TCG. trading card guild"<br /><br /><b>Back 1:</b> "Made and printed in U.S.A. Trading Card Guild, Mfr. A division of Topps for Toys. Copyright 1951. Brooklyn, N.Y."<br /><br /><b>Back 2:</b> "Collect Official Trading Cards. Collecting trading cards is an exciting and educational hobby for boys and girls. Many of the world's leading citizens take pride in their collections, which they started in their youth. Even today they continue to search for new and interesting subjects. It's fun! It's educational! It's valuable!"<br /><br />---------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br /><img src="http://members.aol.com/bmwcards/51cellowrapper.jpg"><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DD</b><p>1951 Topps Freedom's War set was also issued in panels. They were sold in 5 cent packs with a wax wrapper, as well as similar cardboard packaging as shown above.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jon Canfield</b><p>I have the original box I can photograph if anyone is interested in seeing it?...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>HW</b><p>I have never seen those 1951 cello packs before. <br /><br />I hav seen the 1951 panels, team cards and all-stars come in a plastic baggy with a header card and in a wax pack, but never in a cello pack.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>I'm bringing this thread back because I'm doing some research and have a few questions.<br /><br />It's my understanding that the Bowman v. Topps lawsuit (March '52) was partly based on Topps' decision to sell their 1951 baseball products with candy, and Bowman feeling they had a right to this pairing. However nowhere does any of the 1951 Topps packaging here reference caramels or gum. What am I missing? Were they just sold side-by-side?<br /><br />I realize the case had other implications too, but I'm just trying to understand this part of it.<br /><br />Thanks in advance for any insight.