1982 Topps Blackless

[frankhardy]

I am a Cardinals team set collector as many of you know. I am of the opinion that these are print defects and I don't include print defects in my collection. I am sure I am in the minority on this. Can some one explain why these are not just considered a print defect?

[ALR-bishop]

I think you are in the majority but there are a bunch of weirdos, as evidenced by the never ending variations thread, that collect recurring print defects. Sometimes if that defect gets hobby recognition even a green smudge in a baseball on a card back gets value above it's common counterpart. Sometimes those print defects bring perplexing premiums due to hobby recognition, like the 58 Herrer. In fact, all Blackless cards are themselves just recurring print defects. The Blackless cards for whatever reason gained hobby recognition

And if there is a recurring or even one time oddity on a star card, player collectors sometimes have to have it.

Be glad you do not have that illness, Shane

I do agree that this card should not be sold as a Blackless card, but rather as a rare Brett error card.

[frankhardy]

So.... Reoccurring is the key word. I don't have the print defect illness, but I do have a chronic, though not debilitating, Cardinals team set illness.

[bswhiten]

Originally Posted by frankhardy

So.... Reoccurring is the key word. I don't have the print defect illness, but I do have a chronic, though not debilitating, Cardinals team set illness.

Maybe this will help you with a print defect illness...Blackless Cardinals lol

[bobsbbcards]

Psssst.....that's a Padre.

[bswhiten]

Originally Posted by bobsbbcards

Psssst.....that's a Padre.

Haha... he will always be a Cardinal to me

[mybestbretts]

Well, you have to assume after all this time that the seller has no intention of closing down the sale of this card on ebay. All I can say is ebay has been
notified and so has the seller. I have sure lost respect for this seller, hope he makes me change my mind and does the right thing.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by frankhardy

I am a Cardinals team set collector as many of you know. I am of the opinion that these are print defects and I don't include print defects in my collection. I am sure I am in the minority on this. Can some one explain why these are not just considered a print defect?

They are print defects but they very rare print defects.

I collect them because I'm a Mets completist. Of all the 1980's hard to find stuff (1985 Minis, 1988 Cloth, 1989 Heads Up, 1984 Encased, etc) these have been the hardest, I've been collecting them for about 2 years and only have 1/2 the Mets team set.

[ALR-bishop]

The 1982 Blackless set gained recognition after being listed as a separate set in the SCD Standard Catalog. I assume they did that because the defect is scarce, but occurs on 396 cards from the entire set, and despite the defect, was distributed in packs at retail.

Another tough Topps issue from the 80s for Yankee and Met collectors are the Met/Yankee Double header prototypes, which were sold in packs in a limited retail market. Much scarcer than the 89 or 90 regular issues, or even the other prototypes for them

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

The 1982 Blackless set gained recognition after being listed as a separate set in the SCD Standard Catalog. I assume they did that because the defect is scarce, but occurs on 396 cards from the entire set, and despite the defect, was distributed in packs at retail.

Another tough Topps issue from the 80s for Yankee and Met collectors are the Met/Yankee Double header prototypes, which were sold in packs in a limited retail market. Much scarcer than the 89 or 90 regular issues, or even the other prototypes for them

Al, are you referring to the ones with the 1988 Topps card?

[ALR-bishop]

Jim---I am in general agreement with you on tough Topps issues from the 80s. For me the 82 Blackless, 84 Encased, the 85 Minis ( blank and regular backs), 88 Cloth and 89 Big Sucker Heads were all tough.

The 89 regular Double Header All Star set of 24 was pretty easy. They were mini cards in a two way plastic stand with a copy of the players 89 card and his earlier rookie card. A little tougher was the Double Header Yankees and Mets set of 24....same format, 89 mini card ( paper thin) and reproduction of prior rookie card in plastic stand up. But much harder to run down are the Double Header Mets/Yankees Proof or Prototype cards. There were only 8 and the holder has the 88 version of their cards and their rookie card. They were issued in packs but on a very limited basis

The prototype packs are the clear ones with shorter CL

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Jim---I am in general agreement with you on tough Topps issues from the 80s. For me the 82 Blackless, 84 Encased, the 85 Minis ( blank and regular backs), 88 Cloth and 89 Big Sucker Heads were all tough.

Hey Al, you know I love the test sets and 85 is my favorite of the 80s by far. The variations are why I love it. I have examples of the full stats, blank vanilla, blank tan, the Acme and Fuchs prototypes that TATSR bought in the golden auction in 15 (and I still want that Jim Davenport I begged for a couple times,lol) but have not picked up a red print back yet.

Did you complete any of the variation sets?