Hot cards back in the day would say POR a lot in ads, or just not offered. 591 is the Grant Jackson card, 598 is Gaylord Perry. Dealers in the Northeast (and possibly country-wide) hoarded these for a long time as they believed they were actually short printed. They would not have been replaced on the sheets but their positioning could have damaged them in production causing some to be pulled. Edges and corners are usually the worst places to be on a sheet damage-wise.

This matches my own slight research on the scarcity; I have them checklisted in my master set the same way



I still think 591 is actually no rarer than 10 or 21 other cards; just hoarded and a manufactured pain point. 598 Perry definitely seems to have 'fallen off' a bit comparatively over the years

I analyzed approximately 30 marked series 7 checklists over the past month to see which numbers were checked off. Interestingly both 591 and 598 were marked off as frequently, if not more so, than most of the other cards. Similarly, cards #544, 580, and 550 were not uncommon. As a result, I suspect that the print pattern utilized was 4 rows three times each and three rows four times each, so the relative scarcity is probably not significantly different for any card from this series, it's just that the overall quantity is low and demand is high.

Back 30 years ago when I first put this set together my toughest get was 598 perry. It was priced as a tough get. 2nd was the Clarke card #547. 3rd was coleman #561. #591 was not in the conversation. Last week an unopened cello for the 7th series was advertised. The top had Larry Jackson, but the bottom had card #512. So that nixed the bidding for me. Wonder what was inside? How could #512 be in a 7th series cello? A 1st series was also offered. Klaus on the top and Ranew on the bottom.

1966 Topps high variations
 

I have been attempting to determine the rows in which various cards were located for the 1966 high numbers and came across this oddity for Larry Jackson, # 595 and this one for Gaylord Perry # 598. [ATTACH]Attachment 406859[/ATTACH]

Never saw that one before. With any card where there are 2 sheets I'm not surprised with cropping differences or this type item.

I don't know much about 1966 and 1967 Topps high number short prints, I did some searching for miscut 1966 short prints and was surprised at how few I could find that went into an adjacent card. It wasn't an extensive search but these were all I could find. I don't know if the Tebbetts is considered an SP or not.

1966 high cards
 

Thanks. That helps identify that Choo Choo (561) is definitely next to Chance (564) and that Tebbets (552) is below Choo Choo and in the row headed by Cards rookies. The Clarke (547) is above Horlen (560) as shown in that miscut. Interestingly, I have been scouring ebay for the last month and not seen those miscut cards. Where did you find them?

1966 high # miscuts
 

And Tebbets (552) is adjacent to Siebler (546)

1966 Topps 7th series rows updated
 

Based on the miscut information shown, we can positively identify the following:

Row A (COMPLETE ROW OF 11): 554 Northrup SP, 568 A’s Rookies, 584 Yankees Rookies, 581 Tony Martinez, 534 Mets Rookies, 558 Red Sox Rookies, 573 Griffith, 536 Egan, 529 White Sox Rookies, 572 Priddy, 574 Mets Rookies

Row B (COMPLETE ROW OF 11): 557 Mantilla, 588 A’s Rookies, 545 Dick Green SP, 526 Twins Team SP, 589 Klimchock, 593 Camilli, 563 Twins Rookies, 578 Olivio SP, 548 Kroll SP, 524 Giants Rookies, 539 Astro’s Rookies

Row C (START OF ROW CONFIRMED): 591 Rookies (Grant Jackson) SP , 540 McClain SP, 567 Howser SP, 527 Navarro, 577 Lamabe SP, 596 Astro’s Rookies SP, 551 Purkey SP, 543 Craig SP

Row D (START OF ROW CONFIRMED): 555 Perranoski SP, 562 Snyder, 559 Pena SP, 564 Chance SP, 561 Coleman SP

Row E (START OF ROW CONFIRMED): 544 Cards Rookies SP, 565 Piersall SP, 547 Clarke SP, 546 Siebler, 552 Tebbets SP

Row F (START OF ROW CONFIRMED): 585 Taylor, 530 Robin Roberts, 560 Horlen, 571 Dave Roberts SP

Row G (START OF ROW CONFIRMED): 594 Salmon, 535 Willie Davis SP, 575 Wilson, 580 Williams SP

The McCovey 4 card strip (550 McCovey SP, 533 Adair SP, 579 Orioles Rookies, 537 Franks) must be a continuation of either row F or row G, and I lean towards row G because of the thick left edge border found on those cards). In addition, the Sullivan strip (597, 592, 549) must also be placed; the checklist (517) is most likely at the end of an SP row, and we know that Perry (598) is above Jackson (595).

In addition to the above 10 cards, the following card locations are unknown: 523, 525, 528, 531, 532, 538, 541, 542, 553, 556, 566, 569, 570, 576, 582, 583, 586, 587, 590.

I scour eBay current and completed items, COMC, Dean’s Cards, WorthPoint and just plain ol’ Google searches. Sportslots and Amazon aren’t worth the trouble to look through. Unless I am misunderstanding you, that isn’t Tebbetts directly underneath Coleman, the card under Coleman has a clear blue sky and Tebbetts has obstructions at the top of his card. ETA: It looks like it could be one of two Indians, #525 Gary Bell or #538 Bob Allen, it looks like it can't be #547 Dick Howser or #581 Tony Martinez. It looks like Bell to me. I should have said partly cloudy rather than clear blue sky :D.

I think it's gary bell under choo choo

Does nt look like tebbets is next to siebler, siebler is blue not purple i think siebler is next to bell and tebbets is next to monteguido

Definitely Bell, not Tebbets, below the miscut.

The top/bottom doesn't always mean we can place them though, yet at least; it doesn't mean Bell was necessarily next to Siebler because we don't know how the rows were placed. We know the 11 cards in a row are probably a constant as Topps didn't change that, but with some of the highs the rows weren't always placed in the same repeating order; thus a Coleman may have been on top of 2 different rows in its spot on the sheet, not always the same row beneath the Choo Choo row.

The Tebbets in the amended version of my compiled list in post 90 by Kevvyg1026 should be removed and placed with Bell or more accurately a "possibly Bell", I think.

Great searching Cliff! So Bell is under Coleman. Monteguido next to Tebbetts.And re-confirms Clarke over Horlen.

I had to laugh when I saw the Davis. I don't know which direction the Hoerner was printed but it is definitely an edge card on that jagged side.

The Davis must be on top of #568 Lindblad/Stone

The worst cut Hoerner shows Tebbets below. I'm not sure it's the same gray-color card beneath it in the next image though.

1966 high miscuts
 

I believe the worst cut Hoerner actually shows Taylor (585) below. I think one of the other Hoerner miscuts shows Perranowski above it, so both cards show the same pattern as what we already know.

Tebbets is in the middle of the sheet somewhere, on a row not yet identified.

One of the Shirley/Jackson miscuts may be above Salmon (594) or Taylor (585), while one is below one of those two cards as well. This gives some insight into a possible pattern on the sheet since 591 is below a different card than what is shown on other uncut material.

The Davis miscut, I think, shows the A's rookie card (568). This means that at some point on the sheet, the row with Davis (i.e., headed by Salmon) was definitely above the row headed by Northrup. This supports, but is not conclusive evidence, that the McCovey 4-card strip may be in the row headed by Salmon,as well.

What grabbed me was the border space in comparing the odd shaped 544 cut above to a more normal 544 cut. the odd shaped looked like it was on the top corner of a sheet. also what card has that brown border?

1966 high # miscuts
 

It is certainly possible that 544 is at top left of the 2nd sheet. Based on examining various illustrations of that card, some do have what appears to be an extra wide top border. One would probably need to find Piersall, Clarke, and Siebler as well with large top border to be more certain about that, however.

Northrup row also appears to have extra wide top border, so it my be that one sheet has Northrup at top left and the other has 544 top left.

More great discoveries Cliff. And great interpretations by Kevvy(#99) ! BillP I agree on that weird colored card adjoining Hoerner it looks brown....I have made big maps of these discoveries-haha--trying to plot it out. Very exciting as a '66 fan to see this guys.Thanks again.

I think the card above Hoerner has the same dark red rectangle block as the Perranoski. The Perranoski has a yellow rectangle block card above it, the Franks has a lime green sideways card to the left of it. ETA: It has to be the #579 Davey Johnson three player rookie card to the left of Franks, which may already be known.

I think these are new.

1966 high # miscuts
 

Awesome work Cliff. I wish I knew where you find these miscuts as I can't seem to mfind them.

Yes, Franks (537) is adjacent to Johnson Rookie (579) and Hoerner rookie (544) is below Perranowski (555) at some point on the two half-sheets.

The Tiger team info is new. It looks like the Tiger team (583) is above either Sadowski (523) or Wilson (575). The second image appears to place the Tiger team card left of a Tiger or Cardinals card because of the yellow, but it could be one of several cards.

I know it isn't Northrup (since he leads a row), Navarro (he is right of Howser), or McLain (who is right of 591). Unfortunately, that still leaves as possibilities McFarlane (569), Mahaffey (570), or Sullivan (597) as possibilities and I don't know where any of those three cards are located.

I lean towards it being McFarlane simply because his card may be a SP like the team card is, but that is simply my guess.

1966 high # miscuts
 

and yes, Perranwoski (555) is located below Northrup (554) at some point, so the yellow block makes sense.

I would say McFarlane is a match.

I believe it has to be Sadowski under the Tigers team card. It would be showing the top of Wilson's cap if it was him.

Thank you for finding and posting these images, I think you’ve posted more in a couple days than I was ever able to find over a couple years trying to do this by myself lol.

There is an ebay item listed that has 3 miscut 66 highs right now. Horlen is on top on 575 earl wilson, 542 george smith is on top of 550 mccovey and 533 adair is on top of 558 red sox rookies.

1966 topps high number miscut lot in ebay

billp

I second that--thanks so much. This info is amazing. I love the '63 info ,too. But '66 has always been such a big question mark for me. I have my 7th Series checklist from childhood still.Most of that collection was lost or thrown away. It is the W.Sox Rookies version.It has 16 cards checked on it from the final 7th series sheets. And I remember at least three more I had that were not checked for some reason.I will list the checked cards first:525,528,531,546,547,549,553,557,561,568,571, 586,587,589,592&598.The three I recall having but are unchecked:544,583,&591.If this checklist is included that is 20 cards total(which would equal 4 packs).I speak of these cards because I am really surprised how many SP's or difficult ones I had out of such a small sample.I always wondered about the true rarity of some of these.

I am hoping some of this new info may sometime answer some questions.
As I stated earlier most of my collection was lost or thrown away.Probably in the late 60's. I found the remains in '87 or'88. I had Gary Bell(525),Dave Roberts(571)& Tigers Team(583)left over.And the checklist!

1966 high # miscuts
 

Anyone wish to hazard a guess about the adjacent cards for this one? Both top & right sideAttachment 407528 Attachment 407529

Above Snyder must be a card with a purple rookie banner, as that banner color is only at the top left

And for posterity, here is the image of the eBay lot that Bill mentioned a few posts above:

so above Snyder is 568 (A's rookies) and to the right is Pena (559): same as what was known.

Incredible work fellas! As one who struggled and finally completed 66 set this is an awesome thread!

Nevermind

1966 high # miscuts
 

Here is a McLain with, I believe, 568 A's rookies above it.Attachment 407542

568 on top of both Snyder and McClain on different parts of the sheet. Several new pieces a day, we'll have the full sheet recreated by next week at this rate! I did not have nearly so much luck showering eBay and COMC the last few days

1966 high # miscuts
 

A quick summary of what I understand about the 1966 7th series rows, based on the material shown so far.

We know there are seven unique rows, headed by 554, 555, 544, 585, 594, 557, and 591 (i.e., column 1).

We know all 7 unique cards and their individual rows for column 2 (568, 562, 565, 530, 535, 588, 540).

We know all 7 unique cards and their individual rows for column 3 (584, 559, 547, 560, 575, 545, 567).

We know all 7 unique cards and their individual rows for column 4 (581, 564, 546, 571, 580, 526, 527).

We also know all 7 cards in column 5 (524, 561, x1, x2, x3, 589, 577) where x1, x2, and x3 represent 550, 525, and 542 but we don't as yet know which row those last three cards are in. We do know that at some point in the sheet 561 is above 525, 525 is above 542, and 542 is above 589.

For column 6, we only know 5 out of the 7 cards (558, 593, 596, 538, 533), and we do not know which rows two of those cards are in (538, 533).

There is also more info available based on examination of miscuts such as:
a. 598 being above 595,
b. 597,592, and 549 are in the same row,
c. 532 & 552 are in same row
d. 583 is in same row as 569 and is also above 523 at some point in the sheet.

Above McLain might also be 588. Hard for me to tell the difference.

Thank you for keeping my original row summary updated and making this column one! I've forwarded this thread to a few collectors I know who aren't on forums and have full 66 runs, hopefully will score a few more photos to add to our knowledge

I think it is 588, not 568.

Mike

erratum: 542 is above 550, not 589

Great job, in column 5 x1 has to be 525 if it is on top of 542 and x3 has to be 550 if below 542 (x2). Am I right? I'm going to take my actual cards today and look over this puzzle placing them out, the checklist is still open at the end of column 11. Which one though? w.Sox or White sox?

If we know that mccovey is in the 5th position on the 5th column, then the mccovey strip extends out into column 6,7,8 from there and if adair is in the 6th column then we know what is below adair now.

I believe the 7th series checklist was the W. Sox version while the White Sox version was printed as part of the 6th series. I base this on two somewhat flimsy pieces of evidence. First, the White Sox version appears to be available more frequently (so appears to have been printed in higher quantity) and 2nd, I have found multiple White Sox versions checked only up to #522, but not seen that on a W.Sox version.

That is my thinking as well. It would be great if we could find a McCovey with B. Williams to its left, or vice versa so we could confirm that the 4-card McCovey strip is in the same row as Salmon thru Williams (which is what I suspect).

My thinking goes like this:
row A - headed by Northrup
row B - headed by Perranowski
row C - headed by Hoerner rookie
row D - headed by Taylor
row E - headed by Salmon
row F - headed by Mantilla
row G - headed by Shirley/Jackson

Then the first sheet pattern would look like: A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E which is identical to what was used in 1965 (both 5th series & 7th series) and 1967 (7th series).

The 2nd half-sheet is still unknown but could look like: B, C, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G. This puts 533 in row C, column 6, and puts it on top of 558 at one place on the sheet.

517 has to be on the right edge of a row that has mainly or all non-sp. The F and G rows would imply that there are 22 true sp's. Now this again calls into question what are the sp's? some of our sheet pattern has supposed sps on the same row as non sps. if we take a leap that rows f and g are true sp's, what of the unplaced cards are assumed sp's that would fit on f and g. the checklist 517 has to be on the end of row e.

billp

If the pattern is correct A B and C are overprinted

Just based on the cards in each row, my guess is A, D and E but that's based on perception. Whatever rows have 523, 560,572, and 573, to name a few are much more common than others.

I'm laying out all the clues that we have and I think that I have discovered that the miscut adair I found that is above red sox rookies 558 is in an additional row above the Northrup row. Reasoning is that adair is next to mccovey who is below smith who is below bell who is below coleman who is below 534. 558 is next to 534 so the miscut adair has to be in a row above that. Bottom line is on 1 sheet the row with adair in it (salmon row) is double printed.

This 8 card sheet would imply that olivo (in the mantilla row) is below Egan (in the northrup row), but that again doesnt line up with our sequence of the far left card in the 7 rows. So this sheet must be a clue for the other 4 rows on a possible 11 row sheet. Or else, this 8 card cut came from a separate run of 8 card blocks produced separately.

Same with this 12 card block. If the Northrup row is above the mantilla row then these 2 8 and 12 card sheets fit, but we know that the northrup row is above the Perranoski row,
So these have to be separate blocks of a sheet.

Ok, last post for the afternoon on this (I promise), very interesting stuff though. I think from all the input I believe this is the row sequence:
A - Northrup
B - Taylor
C - Salmon
A - Northrup
D - Perranoski
E - Hoerner
B - Taylor
C - Salmon
A - Northrup
F - Mantilla
g - Jackson/Shirley on the bottom corner and open to damage etc.

This sequence includes the input of the 8 card and 12 card sheets and what we know from the miscuts that have been researched.

Other tidbits: Tigers Team/McFarlane has to be in the Hoerner row, so does Perry. That puts Sadowski and Jackson in the taylor row s well.

No! Keep ostimg. This is a great thread.

I looked at all my 66 high numbers and no miscuts. First time I wish I had some.

Mike

I have a scan of a miscut Jimmy Piersall with what I am positive is a sliver of the top of the Dick Green under it but I was hesitant to post it, but it now makes sense with your sequence so I will post it tonight.

Thx Mike, others have done more than me I just had some time to go over all the threads. One takeaway is that 550 Mccovery is not an sp. 554 northrup is also not an sp. 563 twins rookies is also 562 snyder and via recent pricing these last 2 make sense. Mccovey pricing may just be star power.

This seems to be the case. Snyder used to be considered a SP but in recent years has had that designation removed in most checklists and guides. Looks like the original judgement was probably correct for him, though the 90's guides used to seem to think there were different tiers of SP'ing as well that I don't think is true at all, and which I think the miscuts and partial blocks we've found in this thread indicate.

Building most of my set in the Bay Area via card shows c. 2001-2005, McCovey sure seemed tough, and Perry was the #1 to get. Probably local bias on the McCovey front; I do suspect we will find Perry is a probable SP but not to the overhyped levels 598 and 591's reputations suggest...

This has become a fantastic thread, thank you all. I heard from 3 more lower grade set collectors who report nothing but a single Coleman miscut that "might be Chance" in their stacks; fitting my card earlier and the other one that I think Cliff posted.

Never mind, I screwed up royally on this post.

Great, i think we are about 5 miscuts from solving this.

But that sliver doesn't show the black lined border. And that little area of white doesn't seem to match Green's top either. Is there any other possible card it could be? Could it be extraneous stuff at the very bottom of the print sheet?

I believe that the checklist would be on a row that was short printed, since it was previously printed in the last series as well. In addition, for this printing, it is entirely possible that four rows were printed 3x each (the SPs) and three rows printed 4x each, so there would be 43 SPs (44 - checklist) but they are only mildly short printed.

Of course, if the pattern on the 2nd half sheet is different than that described above (i.e., 7th series 1967), then there might only be 11 or 22 real SPs. Until that pattern can be established, we won't know.

The lack of the black line on Piersall makes me think the color there is actually part of the multi color stripe on the bottom of many uncut sheets used to test the ink colors if something goes wrong on a sheet. IF it's this, and not Green, that is still a very helpful clue.

Is this a missing link or is it already known?

I think this is new; we know McCovey to the right (McCovey-Adair-O's Rookies-Franks), but were not sure which row precisely that strip fit into. It would appear the card next to him, based off what is know and still a ?, is probably 580 Williams, placing the McCovey strip in the row headed by 594 Salmon, that is known until it ended part way at 580 Williams

Somebody correct me if I mixed up my graph over here lol

1966 high # miscuts
 

This is awesome. McCovey is the 5th card in a row and must be next to either Siebler, Roberts, or B. Williams. This appears to establish that his card is next to Williams and is therefore in the row with Salmon, Davis, Wilson, and Williams.

I think it can be stated a fact that Davis, McCovey, Williams not Adair are short prints at all now.

i don't think any card on the salmon row is an sp. the star power factor made them sp. the mccovey to the right of williams fits into my early today scheme of the sheet. thx, keep the miscuts coming from wherever. how about a miscut checklist.....

So close.

ok, now the tough part. what card on the back has that size salmon color.

1966 high # miscuts
 

That checklist card may be from the 6th series printing as it shows White Sox

It is undoubtedly an edge card on the right side, either the fourth and twelfth row or just the eighth row. I thought about buying the card to get an exact measurement of the salmon ink area but the seller wants $18.50 for that card. Is it possibly from the 6th series sheet rather than the 7th series sheet? Has it been established which one has White Sox and which one has W. Sox?

1966 high # miscuts
 

I am almost positive that White Sox is 6th series and W.Sox is 7th series.

Also, the Piersall card is in column 2 of the sheet, so it must be above either 568, 588, 540, 562, 530, or 535 and not above Dick Green. I lean towards either 568 or 588. And if it's 568, then that means another miscut (Adair above R Sox rookies) can locate Adair in column 6 of the Hoerner row.

1966 high # miscuts
 

We do not know the row location of the following cards: 517, 523, 528, 531, 532, 538, 541, 549, 552, 553, 556, 566, 569, 570, 576, 582, 583, 586, 587, 590, 592, 595, 597, or 598.

We do know:
a. 598 is above 595
b. 597, 592, 549 are in same row
c. 517 should be at end of row
d. 532 and 552 are in same row
e. 583 and 569 are in same row, while 583 and 523 are in same column
f. we know every card in columns 1 through 5 for all seven rows.

Very helpful finds would include:
a. cards to right of 561, 533, 542, 537, 543, 598, 595 or
b. above 533, 538, 579, 537
c. left of 517, 598, 595, 583, 597
d. below Northrup row but excluding Mantilla row. In other words, we already know 558 borders 593, 573/563, 536/578, 529/548, 572/524, and 574/539 but other combos would be helpful.

You’re right, the trees from the Green card that my eyes were seeing is actually chipping on the black border line. I kept having the same problem looking at 1963 cards, chipping on the black border lines on the edges of miscut cards. I shouldn’t have posted that one.

1966 high # miscuts
 

This is why I think the White Sox variation is the 6th series printing (in addition to the available quantity) and why I believe W. Sox variation is at far right of sheet.Attachment 407726

Attachment 407727

Attachment 407728

1966 high # miscuts
 

any guesses? Sorry, but it's the best image I could getAttachment 407729

1966 high # miscuts
 

Any guesses?Attachment 407730

Boy, do I feel like an idiot now. I didn’t join this thread until halfway through, but I should have looked through it carefully from the start. I didn’t realize there were scans of all of those partial sheets in posts 20-22 and 25, it would have made a world of difference in what I have looked for and what I have posted. Oh well.