New member with a 67 baseball question.
 

Hello,
I would like to introduce myself to the board and also have a question. My name is Jim and a Detroit Tigers and Topps baseball fan.

I am currently completing a 67 baseball set. This was the first set I ever collected as a kid and is still my favorite.

I am wondering if anyone has a photo of a 67 high number sheet. I searched the archives and found a thread about this topic but could not view the photos.

Thanks :)

1967 Topps
 

Jim

I can not help with the sheet, but I have the set, the variations to it, and a pack; and it is one of my favorites. Also a great year for Topps test stuff--the 2 Disc sets, The Stand Ups, The Punch Outs, The Pin Ups, and Pirate and Red Sox Stickers.

On the other hand I am a Cardinals fan and 1967 was a great year....not so much 1968 :( ;)

Al

Only half of a true 264 card sheet, best picture I could find

http://photos.imageevent.com/ltsgall...highfull_1.jpg

Guys, Thanks so much for the photo and the comments about the set. This helps to gain some insight into the layout of the full sheet.

Jim

Welcome Jim, and good luck with your set!

The row that begins with Pinson
 

On the left and Carew RC on the right are all cards we consider Double Prints. Explains a lot why in that row apparently was printed several times on that sheet compared to the other rows.

Rich

Rich
 

Could you explain that? Are you saying that most full sheets the far left and far right columns would "border" the inside cards and thus are dp's???

On the sheet I posted 5 or the rows are printed twice and 2 of the rows are printed once (row 7 with Hank Bauer and 8 with the Seaver RC).

This alone does not determine the SP's as the other half of the 264 card sheet may have these rows printed 2 times and different rows printed once.

welcome
 

Hey Jim
I just want to say "welcome to Net54baseball." If I can ever be of assistance let me know. I collected late 60's and early 70's as a kid but now am strictly pre-1949, so I stay mostly on the other (dark) side. Take care now....

Thanks for the welcome Leon.

Looking at this sheet makes me wonder even more about the other half. For example, in the Standard Catalog it shows Robinson as a SP but this sheet shows it as a DP.

Others are listed as DP such as Klippstein. Looking at the sheet shows this card only once. To be fair to the Standard Catalog, unless both sides of the sheet can be viewed we really cannot tell.

I have seen full sheets of other series where the RH and LH sides were inverted. In other words, cards short printed on the RH were double printed on the LH sheet to even up the printing.

This is easily done on a series of 88 cards (87 cards and the previous checklist). 88 x 3=264 so each card is printed 3 x.

Another interesting point is that the 67 6th series was also only 77 cards (76 cards and the previous checklist) so that led to some potential short prints. The 6th series does not seem to be mentioned like the 7th series high numbers.

Jim

Here is a link to a prior discussion on these:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ps+High+Number

I have to check but don't believe the 6th series was subject to "checklist lagging" a method where Topps would have checklists showing Series that were either 11 or 22 cards less than what was being printed on each sheet (long story) allowing them to preview some cards from the purported next series to keep the kiddies buying. '67 seems to be the first year they abandoned that practice since commencing it in the late 50's and it led to some funkiness after series 5 as some guides show the 6th series as having triple prints; not sure that's right but it indicates something was up. Don't forget though that the semi-high 6th series is more abundant today than the true highs. Some 67 high numbers are quite hard to track down.

No matter what, every image of a 67 high number half sheet is always of the same half.

Great info, Here is a 5th series 1/2 sheet. Not in the best of shape.
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...67/67sheet.jpg
Jim

Jim, the sheet you posted is pretty much the standard for series 2 thru 5/6 in the 60's. Series 1 sheets in the 60's usually had 2 rows double printed.

The other half of the 264 card sheet would have rows 5 thru 8 on this sheet printed twice as rows 1-4 and 9-12. Rows 1 thru 4 (and 9 - 12) on this sheet would then be printed once on the other half sheet (rows 5 - 8).

88 total cards printed 3 times = 264 cards, no DP's or SP's excluding the current series checklist that was printed with the preceeding series. John

My Favorite Post War Set
 

Opened several boxes as an eight year old looking for the Cardinals.
http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s...r/67tboxes.jpghttp://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s.../AUTOS/068.jpg

Nice trio of boxes and signed card. Does anyone know what series the pinups were included in?

Jim

the later series but not sure which one they started with.

Keith O. opened a 6th series pack on his show around a year ago and it had a Hank Aaron poster IIRC. John

Darren Prince's book has 7th series packs with these as well. It seems the first series did not have the posters; they may have been added mid-run to entice sales. I wonder if the first Fleer/Laughlin packs came out in '67 and Topps decided to include an insert in reaction?

I don't seem to remember them in the 1st series but could be wrong. It was only 44 years ago :)

Here is the Keith Olbermann link to the 67 pack bust:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/...rmann#35430819

Jim

Dave (Toppcat),

are we still waiting to find a picture of the other half of the 7th series sheet? so until we have that we can't really be sure of which cards were truly short printed (or double/triple/quad) printed. Reading the other thread it appears that all our guesses are based on beckett (rich klein?) or somewhere else in hobby lore noting which cards were "double printed". but that could be just a misnomer if they were basing that notation only on the "other" half sheet that today no-one can seem to locate.

Even long before I got to Beckett
 

It was well known that a group of cards were far more easily available in the 7th series, if you read old old hobby news papers, you will see ads for those 10 cards (Carew as a RC was not usually included) and thus I'm perfectly comfortable with the double print information.

Single prints are tough, but I don't know if they are always *AS* tough as you think -- some of that is due to a bizarre distribution pattern of 67 Hi Series cards --- I have heard from several long-time hobbyists that the St Louis area got a ton of those cards -- which makes sense since they were deep into winning the NL pennant that year.

Interesting, that same St Louis area got very few of the 6th series (*semi-hi). I remember my 1st sale at the 1984 National -- close enough to my house where I could bring a ton of inventory -- was a dealer buying me out of all my 67 semi-hi cards. The internet has changed some of that regional shortages,

Dan McKee tells a story about his dad giong to a show and walking out with 9 1967 Topps Brooks Robinsons and I remember (none of these were better than VG) picking up 9 Mike Shannon's at a show in NJ for $1 each. There is also an old hobby story in an Trader Speaks about a dealer circa 1979 selling 80 Tom Seaver RC's @$12 per to another dealer.

I think some of the single prints in 67 may be slightly tuffer to find -- but there is no doubt in my mind that the cards indentified as TP's (or DP's) are exactly that.

Rich once wrote (many years ago) to me the Beckett DP report for the 7th series was based upon a partial uncut sheet with multiple showings of the 22 Beckett DP's. I doubt he would remember the sheet at this point but the Beckett sheet had DP's for 11 of the SP's on the other sheet, so something was different on the two half sheets. For whatever reason, the other half sheet has not been sighted in whole or in part. SCD lists basically match the Beckett list as well. I feel strongly 11 cards are true short prints in the 67 highs but agree we can only speculate as to the TP's (or QP's even).

Gentlemen,
Thanks for the information.

Since no one has a photo of the other ½ sheet, does anyone have a complete high number sheet of another Topps set from that era?

Perhaps looking at that could give some insight into how Topps typically printed a series of 77 cards?

Here is my latest pickup which came from Bob L. Nice supplement to a great set.:)

Jim

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w...ockersfblu.jpg

1969 series 6 is 77 cards and I think I have pictures of both sides of the 264 card sheet.

After analyzing it, 4 rows are printed 3 times (132 cards) and 3 rows are printed 4 times (132 cards). John

Unless that file of uncut sheets photos
 

Made it home with me when I left Beckett, which I doubt, then I wuold have no idea where the uncut sheet information is.

As I said though, I am very comfortable with most of the DP information, not just from those sheets but from my dealer experience in which those cards show up all the time. There is no doubt in my mind that the DP list is correct.

Now, is there truly ONE SP row which is tougher than the others. It is possible but not for sure. I'd like to see the full sheet for that question.

A good example is the SP's in 5th series of 1961 -- I remember seeing that sheet at the Nassau Coliseum in 1993, and that sheet confirmed what we in the hobby long suspected that there were certain cards in that series shorter printed than ever other card. We knew from experience, an Al Rosen find of that series that Jim Maloney RC and Bill Skowron (for example) came up at about 1/2 the average rate of the other cards in that series. The sheet had all those cards confirmed as SP's -- it's nice when you can prove your theorem.

If we can ever get a full 67 Hi # Sheet; we'll get the SP answer to go with the DP answer

rich

Rich

I can certainly vouch for the scarcity of Series 6 in St. Louis while Series 7 was everywhere. As a kid, I had lots of '67 high numbers, but not a single card from the 6th. Sometime in the 70's, I bought the entire sixth series from Larry Fritsch for $7.25. I still have the receipt . . . and the cards.

Whenever I come across an old stash of 67's in St. Louis, there are invariably a large number of high numbers, but I have yet to find any from that elusive series 6.