NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on Ebay
Pre-WWII Cards
Post WWII Cards
Vintage Memorabilia
Babe Ruth Cards
Ty Cobb Cards
Lou Gehrig Cards
Mickey Mantle Cards
Goudey Cards
Bowman Cards
T205s on Ebay
Tobacco "T" Cards
Caramel "E" Cards
Vintage Baseball Postcards
Football Cards on Ebay
Exhibit Cards
Strip Cards
Baking Cards
Sporting News
Playball Cards on Ebay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-27-2017, 12:10 PM
flkersn flkersn is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 73
Default For 52 T Gray geeks only

For 1952 Topps gray backs, I have been wondering how rare the "white front" cards are relative to the "gray front". I have always heard "about 10%". I thought I would explore the proposition.

For over 12 years I have been cataloguing 1952 Topps gray backs by PSA or SGC flip number, thereby creating a database of unique identifiers. I have created the database from E-bay sales, AH sales, VCP website, registry sets with photos, etc.

A few weeks ago there were 1054 graded Topps and 122 graded SGC cards, total of 1176 graded 1952 T gray backs. I have uniquely identified 730, or 62 percent. (There is surely some error as cards are broken out and re-submitted, etc., but I am hoping that in general the numbers apply.)

The result: 82 "white front" and 648 "gray front". 11%, or 1 in 9 are white. (I also realize that determining color from scans is often an art and not a science, but I am fairly confident in the results.) This clearly assumes that the raw cards out there are in the same proportion. I have obviously seen many raw scans, but there is no way to consistently uniquely identify them to prevent double-counting.

So, "about 10%" seems a great rule-of-thumb.

BTW, the are 14 cards for which I have never identified a white front version:
Widmar, Howell, Hartung, Haynes, Klippstein, Post, Smalley, Marshall, Edwards, Smith, Maxwell, Masterson, Miller, and OF COURSE, Reiser.

I will continue research, but I figured at my age I better make public what I have or it may be lost forever. Hopefully the sample size justifies the conclusions. Not sure if anyone is interested in this post, but if so, I welcome comments. And I certainly welcome scans of any privately held cards that would expand the data base.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-27-2017, 12:16 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,268
Default

Bill-- I appreciate the info . Good of you to share it. I think you may have done it elsewhere but would appreciate a scan of both front versions of one of the gray backs side by side if you can do that
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-27-2017, 02:51 PM
Zach Wheat Zach Wheat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,254
Default

Bill,

Are you saying the mid-series "white front" gray back cards are the same as the mid-series gray back glossies? I know the mid-series glossies have been referenced several times on N54 - but no one to date (except maybe Scott and or Ted S) has much experience with these. And no one that I am aware of has ever figured out how common these are in relation to the normal mid-series gray backs. If this is the case, congrats (!) & great information.

I have perhaps 23 mid-series gray backs, but don't think I have any glossies. Unsure if they have white fronts. I am travelling currently and will have to check when I return.

Z
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-27-2017, 05:13 PM
Zach Wheat Zach Wheat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,254
Default

One of the first references I have found pertaining to the mid-series "white front" & gray back glossies came from SCD in their discussion with John Rumierz on refuting their Canadian origin. John was collecting '52 Topps back in the '70's & noted the difference between normal gray backs & the ones with glossy fronts.

The link follows - see item #6, half way down:

http://www.sportscollectorsdigest.com/topps_canadian/

Z
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-27-2017, 06:05 PM
irv's Avatar
irv irv is offline
D@le Irv*n
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 4,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flkersn View Post
For 1952 Topps gray backs, I have been wondering how rare the "white front" cards are relative to the "gray front". I have always heard "about 10%". I thought I would explore the proposition.

For over 12 years I have been cataloguing 1952 Topps gray backs by PSA or SGC flip number, thereby creating a database of unique identifiers. I have created the database from E-bay sales, AH sales, VCP website, registry sets with photos, etc.

A few weeks ago there were 1054 graded Topps and 122 graded SGC cards, total of 1176 graded 1952 T gray backs. I have uniquely identified 730, or 62 percent. (There is surely some error as cards are broken out and re-submitted, etc., but I am hoping that in general the numbers apply.)

The result: 82 "white front" and 648 "gray front". 11%, or 1 in 9 are white. (I also realize that determining color from scans is often an art and not a science, but I am fairly confident in the results.) This clearly assumes that the raw cards out there are in the same proportion. I have obviously seen many raw scans, but there is no way to consistently uniquely identify them to prevent double-counting.

So, "about 10%" seems a great rule-of-thumb.

BTW, the are 14 cards for which I have never identified a white front version:
Widmar, Howell, Hartung, Haynes, Klippstein, Post, Smalley, Marshall, Edwards, Smith, Maxwell, Masterson, Miller, and OF COURSE, Reiser.

I will continue research, but I figured at my age I better make public what I have or it may be lost forever. Hopefully the sample size justifies the conclusions. Not sure if anyone is interested in this post, but if so, I welcome comments. And I certainly welcome scans of any privately held cards that would expand the data base.

Bill
Although I don't currently own any Grey backs, and likely never will, I sure do appreciate you posting this info up as I find it very interesting in my quest to someday complete my 52 Topps set.

Thank you!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-27-2017, 06:27 PM
flkersn flkersn is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 73
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
Bill-- I appreciate the info . Good of you to share it. I think you may have done it elsewhere but would appreciate a scan of both front versions of one of the gray backs side by side if you can do that
Al,

I do not have immediate access to my cards. But perhaps others on this site can give you a scan comparison. Also, if you go to the PSA registry 1952 Topps Super Set, you will see some photos of both variations. For example, Morrison's set.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-27-2017, 06:35 PM
flkersn flkersn is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 73
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zach Wheat View Post
Bill,

Are you saying the mid-series "white front" gray back cards are the same as the mid-series gray back glossies? I know the mid-series glossies have been referenced several times on N54 - but no one to date (except maybe Scott and or Ted S) has much experience with these. And no one that I am aware of has ever figured out how common these are in relation to the normal mid-series gray backs. If this is the case, congrats (!) & great information.

I have perhaps 23 mid-series gray backs, but don't think I have any glossies. Unsure if they have white fronts. I am travelling currently and will have to check when I return.

Z
They are probably the same. The glossies have a bit of a "sheen" to them. Here are my observations from cards that I have actually held in my hand:

All "glossies" are white front.
Not all white front are glossies.
No gray front is glossy.

I don't know if there are two variations of the white front or not. (Lordy, I hope not!) The non-glossy white front could be non-glossy because of wear.

Keep in mind that the cards I am talking about here are ones that I have seen 'live"--a much smaller subset than my original data base. It is impossible for me to tell glossiness in a scan.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-28-2017, 04:54 PM
SMPEP SMPEP is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 851
Default

Bill - Pretty sure the white, non-glossies are really white, glossies that have aged.

Two gray back variations, not 3!

Cheers,
Patrick
__________________
__________________
Looking for 1923 W572 Walt Barbare and Pat Duncan.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-29-2017, 12:20 PM
Zach Wheat Zach Wheat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,254
Default

Al,

Here are 2...the #144 Blake is a glossy white front / gray back and #145 is the normal gray front / gray back. Differences are subtle and color differences could be an artifact of scanning. These were taken from the 1952 Topps Super Set for Harrison in the PSA Registry section. Thanks Bill for pointing this out.


Z
Attached Images
File Type: jpg #144 White.JPG (43.1 KB, 206 views)
File Type: jpg #145 Gray Reg.JPG (40.4 KB, 207 views)
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-29-2017, 12:51 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,268
Default

They do look different, thanks Zach
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-30-2017, 01:03 PM
Zach Wheat Zach Wheat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,254
Default

Bill,

According to G Vrecheck in this link:

http://www.pjdenterprises.com/baseba...pps_print.html

the 3rd series was printed such that the 1st 40 cards (#131-170) were double printed while the remaining 20 cards (#171-190) were single printed. This seems to follow with the commonly accepted mid-series scarcity for gray backs.

Did you notice the same quantity in glossies i.e did they follow this same pattern?

Z
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-01-2017, 12:20 PM
flkersn flkersn is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 73
Default

Great question! The answer appears to be "yes." The ratio of GB/WF to all GB for the first 40 cards is 11.8%. The same ratio for the last 20 cards is 11.2% (well within the accuracy of the data). So I would propose that the white front have a uniform scarcity throughout the 60 cards--about 1 in 9.

But your question took me down a couple of other rabbit holes and kept me up until the wee hours this morning.

I will compose two more responses. The first will cover my take on the distribution of cards with the subset (relative scarcity) and the second will cover relative scarcity of the GBs and GB/WFs when compared to the CBs.

ALERT--52 T GRAY GEEKS ONLY!

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-01-2017, 12:39 PM
flkersn flkersn is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 73
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zach Wheat View Post
Bill,

According to G Vrecheck in this link:

http://www.pjdenterprises.com/baseba...pps_print.html

the 3rd series was printed such that the 1st 40 cards (#131-170) were double printed while the remaining 20 cards (#171-190) were single printed. This seems to follow with the commonly accepted mid-series scarcity for gray backs.

Did you notice the same quantity in glossies i.e did they follow this same pattern?

Z
As promised, here is the second of three notes. The URL you posted posits 200 cards in a print run, with 20 cards quadruple-printed (80) and 40 cards triple printed (120). This would suggest a scarcity ratio of 4:3 or 1.33 between the more scare 40 (unidentified) and the less scare 20 (also unidentified).

Alternatively, about 18 months ago, Patrick proposed the following:

"Here is the layout:

3rd series:
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170
171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180

181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170

Patrick"

This assumes the same 200-card run, but has a different scarcity ratio. Quadruple prints of the first 40 (160) and double prints of the last 20 (40), or a ratio of 2:1.

What do the data say? If you look at the pop report from PSA for CB 3rd series, you get the following average pops:

131-140 483
141-150 489
151-160 487
161-170 492
171-180 467
181-190 390.

The average for 171-180 is probably inflated by about 1000 pop for Martin. If you back out the Martin, you get an average of 410 for those cards.

The data would seem to suggest that there is a clear break in scarcity between the first 40 and the last 20.

The conundrum is that the ratio is about 1.2 between the first forty and the last 20, and not 2.0, as Patrick's scheme would suggest.

I welcome any thoughts.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-01-2017, 01:11 PM
flkersn flkersn is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 73
Default

For those who are still interested, here is my third post in response to Zach. The final rabbit hole I explored is the relative scarcity of GBs and GB/WFs compared to CBs.

Comparing the average pop of CB and GB in the PSA pop report reveals the following: 28,179 CBs and 1055 GBs--a ratio of 1 GB for every 27 CBs. I surmise that this is probably conservative; i.e. collectors are more likely to send in a VG GB Kluttz that a VG CB Kluttz, resulting in a relative over-reporting of GBs.

From this point on, you can make you own assumption about the relative over-reporting of GBs.

So I made the assumption that the pops of Billy Martin may be more representative of the printed universe of 3rd Series. That is, collectors MAY BE just as likely to send in a VG CB Martin as a VG GB Martin. (I welcome other thoughts about this assumption.)

Martin CB-959 pop
Martin GB-19 pop

A ratio of about 50:1. One GB for every 50 CBs.

And from my original post, 1 GB/WF for every 9 GBs

So, my tentative hypothesis:

For every 500 3rd series CB, there are 9 GBs, and 1 GB/WF.

That's it. As always, I welcome feedback.

Bill

PS. If you think I am still too conservative, make your own assumption. Are GBs twice as scare as I postulate? Then for every 1000 CBs, there are 9 GBS, and 1 GB/WF.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-01-2017, 06:53 PM
Zach Wheat Zach Wheat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,254
Default

Bill,

Interesting. Actually I was wondering if the 131-170 and 171-190 groupings follow the 80%/20% distribution posited by others.

If your data is without bias, your data suggests a distribution of 69% / 31%. Is your data random?

Z

Last edited by Zach Wheat; 07-02-2017 at 01:53 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-03-2017, 10:25 AM
flkersn flkersn is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 73
Default

Zach,

Since you and I seem to be the only ones interested in this, I have PMed a response to your question.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-03-2017, 10:49 AM
irv's Avatar
irv irv is offline
D@le Irv*n
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 4,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flkersn View Post
Zach,

Since you and I seem to be the only ones interested in this, I have PMed a response to your question.

Bill
I am also interested so if you don't mind, please keep all your correspondence public.
I know very little about these gray backs, other than what I have read here, since joining back in Jan of 2016, and being a 52 Topps collector, I find this info very interesting.

Last edited by irv; 07-03-2017 at 01:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-03-2017, 11:28 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,268
Default Interest

We will just have to keep ourselves amused Dale
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-03-2017, 01:54 PM
irv's Avatar
irv irv is offline
D@le Irv*n
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 4,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
We will just have to keep ourselves amused Dale
I suppose that's all we can do, Al?

I guess I could look at some of my cards and pretend some are grey.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-03-2017, 02:18 PM
flkersn flkersn is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 73
Default

Sorry if I offended; I wasn't getting any comments, so I figured there was no interest and I would just answer the one who showed interest. No hidden message.

If my data are representative (a legitimate IF), then conventional wisdom about the print run could be in error. There are two premises in the current model Patrick suggested 18 months ago: 1) the cards are generally in numerical order and not randomly placed on the sheet, and 2) Two 100-card sheets constitute a full cycle, which is then repeated. Over enough data, this should lead to a 2:1 ratio and not the ~1.2 that the data show.

Seems to me premise 1) is probably correct. Looks like the way Topps did it over several years and it makes sense. That leaves premise 2). Perhaps there is a third 100-card sheet as part of one printing unit. This third sheet could over-represent the last 20 cards and adjust the ratio downward from 2:1. Indeed three sheets could have 5 of each number. Since the data do show that there is a fall-off in population for 171-190, something else might be going on.

Also, it is interesting to remember that the 20 lowest pop cards are NOT just the last 20, but also some numbers from the first 40, e.g. #161 Rogovin.

All-in-all, I really don't know the answer, Zach. Maybe the cards are randomly placed on an unknown number of sheets, then repeated.

And feel free to entertain yourselves--might be more productive.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-03-2017, 02:24 PM
irv's Avatar
irv irv is offline
D@le Irv*n
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 4,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flkersn View Post
Sorry if I offended; I wasn't getting any comments, so I figured there was no interest and I would just answer the one who showed interest. No hidden message.

If my data are representative (a legitimate IF), then conventional wisdom about the print run could be in error. There are two premises in the current model Patrick suggested 18 months ago: 1) the cards are generally in numerical order and not randomly placed on the sheet, and 2) Two 100-card sheets constitute a full cycle, which is then repeated. Over enough data, this should lead to a 2:1 ratio and not the ~1.2 that the data show.

Seems to me premise 1) is probably correct. Looks like the way Topps did it over several years and it makes sense. That leaves premise 2). Perhaps there is a third 100-card sheet as part of one printing unit. This third sheet could over-represent the last 20 cards and adjust the ratio downward from 2:1. Indeed three sheets could have 5 of each number. Since the data do show that there is a fall-off in population for 171-190, something else might be going on.

Also, it is interesting to remember that the 20 lowest pop cards are NOT just the last 20, but also some numbers from the first 40, e.g. #161 Rogovin.

All-in-all, I really don't know the answer, Zach. Maybe the cards are randomly placed on an unknown number of sheets, then repeated.

And feel free to entertain yourselves--might be more productive.
No offence taken.

I would like to contribute to this thread if I had the knowledge but at this point it's like I am reading from a book gathering as much info as possible.

There was a time or 2 when I thought I may have/own a gray back but that was quickly dismissed, unfortunately.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-03-2017, 04:01 PM
Republicaninmass Republicaninmass is offline
T3d $h3rm@n
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by irv View Post
No offence taken.

I would like to contribute to this thread if I had the knowledge but at this point it's like I am reading from a book gathering as much info as possible.

There was a time or 2 when I thought I may have/own a gray back but that was quickly dismissed, unfortunately.
We can now further debunk the "Canadian" theory!

Also, the 5th series sps are 280-300, not the last row of 10! Why would the 3rd be different?
__________________
SIGNED 1952 Topps
381/407


"Trolling Ebay right now"

Last edited by Republicaninmass; 07-03-2017 at 04:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-03-2017, 05:11 PM
Zach Wheat Zach Wheat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,254
Default

One possible explanation for the difference in print ratios could be related to the initial crude design. It has been documented many times that Cy Berger created this set over his kitchen table, and some half sheets still in existence support this contention. Examples of sheets exist where the borders don't even match up...resulting in notoriously poor centering when the sheets were cut.

Taking this one step further - maybe some of their 3rd sheet mid-series production was never distributed due to poor centering. The only gray backs I seem to find are the ones that are off center 95/5!

Z
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1952 Topps Gray Backs018 Miscut.jpg (77.9 KB, 123 views)
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-03-2017, 05:54 PM
Rrrlyons Rrrlyons is offline
R!CK LYON$
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Washington
Posts: 182
Default

Since you want people to respond and a Bill Wight card was posted I'll share my story. I had a Bill Wight in my collection and I knew it was different than the other one I had so I keep both didn't know at that time their were grey backs.
I'm in OBC and George Vrechek asked if anyone had a grey back Wight because someone needed it to finish their set. So I sent him a picture and said this?
He said yes I believe I traded it to someone here before I was a member.
Don't remember his name but he gave me four grey backs for it then I traded three to Patrick to get down to one again. Then three years ago I found one in Canada to get me up to two again.
I will say I got both of my cards in Canada to stir that pot. One card is graded and this is my second one. Rick
Attached Images
File Type: jpg image.jpg (13.3 KB, 119 views)
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-03-2017, 06:54 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,268
Default

Good story Rick
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-03-2017, 07:38 PM
Republicaninmass Republicaninmass is offline
T3d $h3rm@n
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,071
Default

Also, the Frank House card has a yellow tiger version, as well as the normal orange tiger version However, I have yet to see a variation of the pale tiger similar to that found on the cream backs. It's been either one or the other, with the pale yellow being extremely rare.
__________________
SIGNED 1952 Topps
381/407


"Trolling Ebay right now"
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-03-2017, 09:45 PM
LuckyLarry's Avatar
LuckyLarry LuckyLarry is online now
L@rry T1p+0n
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,027
Default

when I'm at a card show, and I have the time, I'll thumb through the '52 Topps cards and look for the rare gray backs. After many many tries, I found one at a show in "The Villages" (a retirement community in Central Florida). $5 bargain box pick up. I almost never sell cards, but this one I was going to sell. I had it graded, and after talking it over with Patrick, I put it on eBay auction (starting price of $300). To bad a bidding war didn't break out, cause the card only got one bid.

Larry



__________________
Member of OBC (Old Baseball Cards), the longest running on-line collecting club www.oldbaseball.com
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-14-2017, 10:11 AM
Republicaninmass Republicaninmass is offline
T3d $h3rm@n
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,071
Default

it's been getting tougher and tougher to find Grays in the bargain bins! I havent been able to pick up any from a show in quite a while.
__________________
SIGNED 1952 Topps
381/407


"Trolling Ebay right now"
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-19-2017, 07:56 AM
Zach Wheat Zach Wheat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,254
Default

Not meaning to digress from the intent of Bill's original post - but was more than 1 type of gray paper stock used? I've attached pics of the same card #270, a semi-high card, which appears to have been printed on 2 types of paper....both are gray.

Z
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1952 Topps Card Stock #270 Reduced (2).jpg (84.1 KB, 47 views)
File Type: jpg 1952 Topps Card Stock #270 Reduced.jpg (77.7 KB, 46 views)
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Okay, Stat Geeks...Time Was When... clydepepper Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk 0 05-02-2017 04:37 AM
Ted Gray 1955 brimo Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 0 07-31-2013 08:34 PM
Gray-backed Batter Ups? Chris Counts Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 9 10-15-2011 09:19 PM
Looking for cards of Sam Gray Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 8 01-05-2009 09:03 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 PM.


ebay GSB