Rare 1956 Topps Uncut “Sheet” with Mantle and Mays

[Goldberg]

In my 43 years of being involved in the card collecting hobby, and business, I thought I had seen almost everything. Then I saw an item that surprised even me!

Let me state that I am not the owner or consignor of this item, nor do I have any affiliation with Lelands. I rarely post, but feel that this item is significant enough from a historical point of view to warrant doing so. I have seen most major rarities and unusual items in my time working for a major grading company (SGC) and a major auction company (REA). I have personally handled thousands of important items over decades spent collecting and dealing in cards and memorabilia, but none like this.

In the current Lelands auction, there is a 1956 Topps 2nd series Printing Blanket sheet, with a complete 2nd series, including Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays, all with reversed images! I had the opportunity to see the sheet in person prior to it appearing in the auction, and prior to the Sports Collectors Daily article a short time back. Although not as vibrant as a normal uncut sheet in overall appearance, pictures don’t do it justice. I was blown away!

To the best of my knowledge, among the few 1956 Topps uncut sheets that have surfaced, there has not been a 2nd series sheet ever found, auctioned, or displayed publicly. Also, to the best of my knowledge, there has never been a card related printing blanket from any year offered for sale or auction. These printing blankets were used for a brief period to print the cards, and then simply tossed in the garbage - unable to be reused in any way.

This sheet was used to transfer the images from the aluminum printing plates to the cardboard card sheets. As such, it likely printed many, if not all, of the Mantle and Mays cards in the 1956 Topps set.

Here is a link to show how this sheet was used. Printing blankets are still used today in the printing business. The green sheet/blanket in the Trelleborg video is a similar equivalent to the 1956 printing blanket.

https://youtu.be/2AnQgeZ1sgo

This is a very unique piece of Topps card history that gives insight to quantities of each card, as well as placement, on the sheet. I encourage any parties interested in seeing the sheet in person, or acquiring it for their collection, to do so at the National at the Lelands booth (by request per the auction listing), as it will most likely go into a private collection once the auction ends. There is also the possibility the sheet will get cut up into individual cards to be sold to player collectors as production proofs, as have other unusual sheets in the past. There are a lot of Mantle and Mays collectors!

For full disclosure, I am interested in acquiring the sheet and may bid on it. However, I am also interested in way too many other collectibles as well…..so we’ll see! Thanks for reading, and please feel free to comment!

[JustinD]

I wish they would not use the word sheet in any of the description as it is a poor word choice. It is simply a roller blanket for the print process.

I think it is very cool and would be interested as to how time has affected the fragility. I hope it can be flattened enough for a proper framing, although I would imagine a good job of it would add another 4 figures to the investment. I would want it flat and at least a half inch shadowbox gap as touching the glass may transfer or pull color.

I assume it is one of a kind and an absolute fluke that it has survived this long in likely a garage or basement. What a great estate sale find.

good luck and I hope you get it. I would like to see the end product if you display.

[steve B]

I have serious doubts about this.

Lets start by asking why it's full color. since the colors are printed one at a time there should only be one color on the blanket.
Ah, but if it was a multi color press?
All the multi color presses I've seen are basically just longer frame that holds two or more single color press mechanisms.
Some different processes did print stuff like stamps with multiple colors from one plate, but it was sloppy and a totally different process.

Second, leaving the colors on the blanket is horrible practice. We'd wash the blanket down with solvents at least between runs. I guess one might get the colors worn into it, but it seems unlikely that it would survive the washdown at the end of the shift. And I'm not sure 56 topps would have required 3 shifts to get it done.

So I'm not seeing a way this even gets made in a production shop. Mount a blanket, print a color, dismount, remount for the next color..run one pass then swap blankets do that 4 times... No way the boss is letting that level of playing around happen.

[ALR-bishop]

2010….. 19

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by steve B

I have serious doubts about this.

I think your post is very reasonable. The multiple colors included is one of many reasons.

[raulus]

Welp!

Looks like some poor sap got stuck with this piece as the only bidder. Can't decide whether that's just good fortune, or if there was only one person foolish enough to bid on it.

Geez...guess that lucky bidder was me.

Now I just have to figure out what I'm going to do with it.

[swarmee]

Congrats, I guess. If you can debunk it, you might get the company to refund you. If that's what you want. It's definitely a conversation starter piece.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Congrats, I guess. If you can debunk it, you might get the company to refund you. If that's what you want. It's definitely a conversation starter piece.

After I placed my bid, I sent them an email and linked to the concerns raised in this thread. They called me and let me know that they had it authenticated and were confident that it is legit. I’m relying on the AH’s reputation, and I’m hopeful it’s solid. Maybe someday I’ll sell it for 7 figures.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Congrats, I guess. If you can debunk it, you might get the company to refund you. If that's what you want. It's definitely a conversation starter piece.

+1 to above.

I am no expert but I agree with Steve in having extremely serious doubts about it being authentic.

[Grigsby]

My curiosity is killing me.

Anyone have a guess what this actually is?

[ALR-bishop]

Hoping something good for Nicolo

[G1911]

Originally Posted by raulus

After I placed my bid, I sent them an email and linked to the concerns raised in this thread. They called me and let me know that they had it authenticated and were confident that it is legit. I’m relying on the AH’s reputation, and I’m hopeful it’s solid. Maybe someday I’ll sell it for 7 figures.

Who authenticated it and signed off on this?

[Cliff Bowman]

What I wonder is if it is fake how could someone go about making this? Does it match a known sheet of that Series, or is a sheet of that Series even known?

[raulus]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Hoping something good for Nicolo

Thanks Al!

[raulus]

Originally Posted by G1911

Who authenticated it and signed off on this?

They claimed to have taken it to a printer, who authenticated it. They didn't provide additional details beyond this. I wasn't trying to make a federal case out of it. Just wanted to confirm that they had done some diligence, felt really confident about it, and were confirming their confidence to me personally. If they had been uncertain, or hadn't done anything to check it out, then I probably would have pushed harder.

Bottom line for me is that if it's real, then I definitely want it.

If it's a fake, then that's clearly a problem. But if it is fake, then it's not the end of the world. While I'd rather spend my hard-earned cash on legitimate pieces, I guess I'm willing to take a chance on this one. Hopefully I don't get burned.

Amid all that, I also wasn't going to press the issue and demand to retract my bid. It just isn't worth it to me to damage a relationship with the AH. Not after I've already pissed one of them off in spectacular fashion.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by raulus

They claimed to have taken it to a printer, who authenticated it. They didn't provide additional details beyond this. I wasn't trying to make a federal case out of it. Just wanted to confirm that they had done some diligence, felt really confident about it, and were confirming their confidence to me personally. If they had been uncertain, or hadn't done anything to check it out, then I probably would have pushed harder.

Bottom line for me is that if it's real, then I definitely want it.

If it's a fake, then that's clearly a problem. But if it is fake, then it's not the end of the world. While I'd rather spend my hard-earned cash on legitimate pieces, I guess I'm willing to take a chance on this one. Hopefully I don't get burned.

Amid all that, I also wasn't going to press the issue and demand to retract my bid. It just isn't worth it to me to damage a relationship with the AH. Not after I've already pissed one of them off in spectacular fashion.

I hope for your sake it is real. I have significant doubts it is, it’s a difficult item to authenticate though and Leland’s has a vested interest in of course saying it’s good. If it is real you got a very low price on an amazing piece of card history. Being the one willing to take a risk can sometimes pay off, but proving it’s authenticity will be a lot more difficult than proving a real uncut sheet or card is real as there is nothing to compare it too.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by G1911

I hope for your sake it is real. I have significant doubts it is, it’s a difficult item to authenticate though and Leland’s has a vested interest in of course saying it’s good. If it is real you got a very low price on an amazing piece of card history. Being the one willing to take a risk can sometimes pay off, but proving it’s authenticity will be a lot more difficult than proving a real uncut sheet or card is real as there is nothing to compare it too.

Totally understand and appreciate your concerns. And also appreciate that authentication and documentation of said authenticity is a challenging nut to crack. Maybe I can get PSA to slab it for me in a new supermegajumbo slab, and that will eliminate all doubts.

[Cliff Bowman]

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...nting-blanket/

[raulus]

Guess what just arrived in the mail today??!!

A few impressions:

It’s incredibly thick and heavy. Definitely industrial grade. Almost like a great big mat. The back is textured, almost like a bit of wallboard.

The pictures from the listing don’t really capture the colors. It’s definitely dark and dim compared to the actual cards, but in person the colors are much brighter and lively than the listing pics convey. I’ve attached a few pics here to try to capture it a little better.

I’m open to brilliant ideas on whether/how I should display it. It fits nicely rolled up and in the box it came in. While I suppose that’s the cheapest and easiest option, it makes it difficult to impossible to really appreciate.

[Cliff Bowman]

Awesome! It looks like it might be a near complete original double sheet containing both Slits. The top part has nine rows and the bottom part has ten rows with a white alley in between, I am assuming the top row is missing from the Slit with nine rows. It appears each row has seven complete cards and a half of a card at the start of the row so that means the first three and a half cards are missing from each row. ETA, since the sheet is printed in reverse that means actually the LAST three and a half cards are missing from each row.

[toppcat]

Is the middle of the gutter bisected by a line?

[raulus]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Is the middle of the gutter bisected by a line?

If the gutter is the spot about 40% down on the piece where there is a bit of a double wide border between the cards, then the answer is yes, although it’s very thin.

Here are a couple of closer up pictures of that section.

[e6phillips]

I have no idea about the issue of authenticity, but the layout is consistent with the miscuts from the second series that I've been collecting over the past few years (I've seen no other picture of a second series sheet).

Cool item!

[Cliff Bowman]

Here are flipped pics of the reversed sheet.

[Cliff Bowman]

The 1956 Topps 2nd Series is #101 - #180 which is 80 different cards. This blanket has two identical Slits with ten rows each, although the first Slit is missing the top row. The question is, was this Series printed up with only 8 cards in each row or does each row have 11 cards and the last 3 cards on each row are double prints? I don't think I have ever seen a sheet printed like that.

[Cliff Bowman]

Kevin (Kevvyg1026) told me that the Slits must have 11 cards on each row so apparently the Slits must go like this 1956 3rd Series sheet, the last 3 cards in each row are double prints, so now the question is which 3 columns are repeated and do both Slits have the same exact 30 cards as double prints or does each Slit have 30 different cards double printed?

[Kevvyg1026]

My impression is that the 1956 cards were oversized and that the slits had 110 cards (10 x 11) each. there is one complete series 1 slit which bears this out.

I have seen a slit for the 3rd series and the 4th series. Both series were 80 unique cards, with 110 card slits, and had a pattern of 10 rows by 11 columns (in a horizontal layout). Columns 2, 3, 4 were repeated at the right side

56 Topps 4th Series Sheet Front.jpg

56 Topps 3rd Series Sheet Front.jpg

1956_sheet_series_1_full.jpg

[bnorth]

Eddie Mathews

If someone can explain the white on the blanket and Eddie having a blue shirt I am all ears.

[Cliff Bowman]

After doing a quantities seach on eBay it is obvious that columns 1-3 were double printed on the right end of one Slit and columns 5-7 were double printed on the right end of the other Slit. I'm sure this was done purposely because Mays, Killebrew, Hodges, Berra, and Mathews are in columns 1-3 and Mantle, Campanella, and Ashburn are in columns 5-7. I don't have the complete layout of the sheet yet but I do know the 10 cards in the Short Print 4th column are Roselii, Dodgers Team, Carroll, Torre, Kaiser, Owens, Nationals Team. Pepper, Brady, and Pirates Team. Just to give an example of the disparity of the DP's vs the SP's the first three cards in one row of current eBay quantities are Leroy Powell 303 cards, Gene Woodling 228 cards, Dick Brodowski 324 cards, Jim Brady 73 cards. Brady is in the Short Print column 4. The 10 cards in the Short Print column 8 are yet to be determined.

[king11]

I found a miscut of 159-Courtney (8th column, bottom row) that has 164-Killebrew (1st column, bottom row) to the right side. This would seem to bolster Cliff's suggestion that at least one of the sheets repeated columns 1, 2, and 3 as the rightmost columns.

[king11]

I also believe, from looking at the images of the blanket, that the eighth column is probably:

127-Jones, Willie
176-Kellner, Alex
147-Torgeson, Earl
154-Pope, Dave
122-Nixon, Willard
106-Astroth, Joe
167-Dorish, Harry
179-Chiti, Harry
161-DeMaestri, Joe
159-Courtney, Clint

I have found miscuts that show: (a) 147-Torgeson over 154-Pope; (b) 179-Chiti over 161-DeMaestri; and (c) 159-Courtney as the bottom row.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by king11

I also believe, from looking at the images of the blanket, that the eighth column is probably:

127-Jones, Willie
176-Kellner, Alex
147-Torgeson, Earl
154-Pope, Dave
122-Nixon, Willard
106-Astroth, Joe
167-Dorish, Harry
179-Chiti, Harry
161-DeMaestri, Joe
159-Courtney, Clint

I have found miscuts that show: (a) 147-Torgeson over 154-Pope; (b) 161-DeMaestri over 159-Courtney; and (c) 159-Courtney as the bottom row.

Your eyes are better than mine .

[king11]

I am not 100% sure on the order of the eighth column - I used the remaining cards in the 101-180 series and matched them with the images as best as I could. I think it's probably right, but I'm still looking for miscuts to verify it.

Here are the photos for the miscuts (that I mentioned previously) that I've found in the eighth column:

[raulus]

I received a request for some close-ups of the left side, aka the “dark side”.

Fair warning: it gets really dim on this side, and not just because there’s some weird glare going on. The last 2.5 rows are incredibly hard to make out, particularly for the top half. It gets a little better towards the bottom, so hopefully these help.

And if I get lucky, maybe they’ll even be right side up this time!

[Cliff Bowman]

Thank you! We should be able to figure out and confirm those last three columns now.

[e6phillips]

My miscuts confirm your order of the missing column.

Here's (a) Nixon over Astroth, (b) Astroth over Dorish, and (c) Dorish over Chiti.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Eddie Mathews

If someone can explain the white on the blanket and Eddie having a blue shirt I am all ears.

Good question. Although I own this piece now, I know very little about the process that created this piece. Assuming, of course, that it's legit, and not just a fantasy piece or fabrication produced to separate me from my money.

Noodling over this a bit, I noticed that a few of the white areas have the same blue tint. The uniforms of the players on the right side. The white border. All have a similar blue tint.

Not sure how it got to be that way, but it does seem like most of the white bits on this piece have a similar blue tint to them. Although truth be told, the blue on Eddie's shirt does seem to be a stronger blue than the rest.

Edited to add: Looks like the shirts for several other cards have similar issues. Sammy White, Johnny Logan, and Frank Torre, for example. Looks like a lot of them have the same issue.

[Cliff Bowman]

For those that think this is fake, HOW did they do it and WHY would they do it? Did they have access to a genuine 1956 Topps 2nd Series double sheet containing both Slits and make a huge reverse copy of it somehow?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

For those that think this is fake, HOW did they do it and WHY would they do it? Did they have access to a genuine 1956 Topps 2nd Series double sheet containing both Slits and make a huge reverse copy of it somehow?

I don't think any of us are arguing it is positively fake; there is just uncertainty. Post 3 handles the technical aspect well. The other things that make me suspicious are the incredibly vague 'authentication' claim and the more academic challenge of how we authenticate something that is otherwise unknown. Unlike an uncut sheet, we can't compare to actual cards. I have more faith in our printing experts analysis than I do a claim by a vested interest party.

If fake, I would expect it to be modeled off a real sheet. My photo archives only has series 1/3/4 sheets but I'm not sure a series 2 sheet is a secret or something or actually unknown. We've known the single vs. double prints for a long time and I believe that information has been posted to this board before.

As for why someone would fake Mays and Mantle items like this, $$$$. The seller is presumably disappointed in the minimum bid sale whether real or fake.

Again, I hope it is real because unique items are super cool. I'm not sold it is real on an evidentiary basis.

[Cliff Bowman]

I personally don’t care either way if it’s fake or not I’m just glad that we will now be able to make a virtual sheet of the Series and we know exactly how both Slits go. Now watch JMoran pull out a scan of a 1956 Topps 2nd Series Slit .

[cornhusker]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Eddie Mathews

If someone can explain the white on the blanket and Eddie having a blue shirt I am all ears.

I suspect that printing blankets are usually pale blue, the card stock usually white, and the color white often not used. To achieve white, one would allow the white stock to show thu. Even with Grey backs there was probably a white layer added to the print side of the cardboard prior to image printing.
It would be cool if there were some sort of vintage topps mfg video showing the process. Maybe they have some laying around in the vault

[steve B]

The printing blankets on our presses were green.

White is generally not used except if you want a consistent background or to brighten the colors.

50's Topps I think are layered, with a layer of white stock glued to the very rough cardstock. This was done for years. I'm not sure if it was done before or after printing, since I have some 60's "proofs" on nice paper stock.
Of course, Topps being Topps the 68-70 cards often come with an actual white layer on the back.

The M Eddies cap looks very different as well.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

For those that think this is fake, HOW did they do it and WHY would they do it? Did they have access to a genuine 1956 Topps 2nd Series double sheet containing both Slits and make a huge reverse copy of it somehow?

The why is simple.

The how is another question altogether.
I have doubts about the images being all that accurate, and they should be very accurate.
It should be possible to print onto an offset blanket instead of paper. Or as I mentioned run a blanket through multiple color passes.

I know the guys I worked with faked a couple concert tickets on the little press, well enough to pass at the turnstiles. (genuine asshole move, they made multiple pairs and traded /sold them to different scalpers. Like 10 people all showed up for the same seats.) but that was tiny, I think it's max paper size was 8 1/2x 11.

Hiding a big thing like this would be much more challenging. Unless the boss was in on making it or maybe a small shop owner who had a good sized press. *
I'm not sure if the new digital direct to press machines do multiple colors at once.

The catch to any of that as you say is that whoever did it got all the cards right and in the right places. And that's not especially common knowledge.

*A super unlikely method would be using adhesives and removing paper in multiple layers. I made a 78 Topps suncatcher like that using packing tape, but again, a full 56 sheet or even just the cards would be worth much more.

[ALR-bishop]

Great hobby mystery whatever it is or is not

[JustinD]

Well, it really doesn't matter but I still think it's a cool piece and I doubt it's a fake. I am also usually the most doubtful about these things and am somewhat enjoying having a different outlook for once, lol.

It's just so hard to verify a complete unicorn.