Don’t! Thank you for your work here, you’ve found more than the rest of us have combined in like 3 years sign I started this thread lol.

We are getting close to piecing together a sheet I think, not just what the rows were.


Also:
On eBay there is a 591 Jackson with the back of 406 Joe Jay. 406 is a 5th series card of course, but if a sheet was ran with the series 7 fronts and the series 5 backs (using a half printed 5 sheet as scrap for testing?), and a series 5 sheet is known, it could indicate where on the sheet one of Jackson’s appearances was.

I have a 406 Jay somewhere that is wildly miscut and shows it was a border card at bottom, and I think left corner. I will dig out tomorrow and share here, but thus may be more evidence to support our hypothesis that a Jackson was a bottom row corner card

1966 high # miscuts
 

All the miscuts you have posted are helpful; sometime a miscut will appear that has a different card touching (top or bottom) which helps establish the actual row patterns in different sheet locations or can help identify other pieces of info.

Knowing that Perry is above Jackson is useful even though we don't know which of two rows to put them yet as is knowing that Tigers team is next to McFarlane, and it's above Sadowski.

I strongly suspect that we will discover that the SPs listed in the price guides are not completely correct and certainly do not correspond with what the sheet patterns reveal.

Just like what was discovered with the 6th and 7th series 63s, lots of digging, logic, and analysis is required in order to determine what Topps actually did, even though what is discovered may go against what the hobby and/or hobby guides have used for the past 30 years or so.

I hope to do the same for the second half-sheet of 67s and 65s as well in the near future.

You guys are crowdsourcing these high number arrays! I'd like to work on the B slit 1967 hi# sheet myself, will start a thread as first three rows are already known.

1967 Topps High Number Sheet Arrays
 

Sorry, moved it, not sure what happened. See new thread!

Thanks again to Cliff,Kevvy,BillP,G1911,jmoran,stlcardsfan,toppcat ,and other contributors.Great job.

Oh so very close....

Guys, I'm a bit behind on the half sheet part of the discussion. Supposedly there is a 132 card sheet of which I've been working on the 1st card in the row sequence and come up with 11 of those rows ( I believe), not sure on the 12th. Why again does there have to be another sheet or half sheet?

Topps printed two half sheets for each sheet in each series from 1952 until god knows when, Slit A and Slit B, even if the half sheets matched. Most standard size cards were done this way, including other sports and some if not all Non-Sports. 100 card slit from 1952-54, 110 from 1955-56 then 132 from 1957 on. After series-by-series distribution ended in 1973-74, the * and ** sheets still indicate there are two half sheets per "setup".

All the Topps sheets of this era were 264 cards. In the middle of a 264 sheet, there was a white gap; the first thing done after printing was to cut the sheet into two halves for easier handling (at least, I presume this was why, and why most uncut sheets surviving are really half sheets). Each of these half sheets would have 12 rows of 11 cards per row, 132 per half. In some years, we know that the two half sheets that made up one fully printed sheet did not have the same rows in the same places; usually done to balance things out and prevent or limit SP cards, presumably. At this point, I don't think we really have the evidence to say whether both halves were the same or different for 1966, just yet. So, there definitely were 2 half sheets, but it's possible they do directly mirror each other and are the same. More top/bottom miscuts should help us eventually solve this part of the puzzle, if we can keep turning them up.

This has become a great thread gentlemen, thank you all for crowdsourcing this and combining everything together :)


EDIT: Writing while Toppcat was replying too; what he said!

thx, so each sheet is 6 rows by 11 columns. Interesting. No I have to revisit the miscuts to see who is on top of who for the half sheet sequencing.

I was looking at that Howser yesterday on EBay. (As an aside, I tried and failed miserably to post it here. I need to watch you guys for 5 minutes to see how you do it so easily. But I digress). Anyway, It is really hard to tell what is going on with that Howser, but it almost looks like it could be the 575 Jackson below it. Which we determined is definitely under the Perry card. Maybe a different half sheet?

No. Each half sheet has 12 rows x 11 columns 132 cards on each half sheet. 264 total

Does anyone happen to have individual scans (with uniform size/dpi/etc.) of every card from the high series??

If so, I can create an editable document which emulates the set-up of the two 132 card sheets, and each card can be plugged into its proper spot(s) to recreate what the actual sheets looked like. This will make it easy to switch cards around as further knowledge of the layout (or theories regarding it) develops. Think of it as a highly effective visual tool which cuts through all the number juggling.

Edited to add: I'm just downloading the card scans one by one from COMC, so that solves that. So, what I need to move forward is a specific list of what cards to put where across the two separate sheets. If someone can provide me with a row by row breakdown (if a card is unknown, put a capital X in that spot), I can get on this as I await the fireworks.

Here's my first run at it. I took jmoran19's images from post #21 and put this pic (of a section of an uncut sheet) together as a quick example of what this new resource can do...

Attachment 408077

1966 high # miscuts
 

Although we do know which rows many cards are in, we do not know the specific row pattern used for the 1966 high number series. For ease of discussion, let me use the following notation: there are seven unique rows which I will label A through G.

Row A, headed by Northrup, is completely known and has cards (in order from L to R) 554, 568, 584, 581, 534, 558, 573, 536, 529, 572, 574

Row B, headed by Perranowski, has cards (L to R) 555, 562, 559, 564, 561 plus six more, as yet unknown.

Row C, headed by Hoerner rookie, has cards (L to R) 544, 565, 547, 546, 525, plus 6 more as yet unknown.

Row D, headed by Taylor, has cards (L to R) 585, 530, 560, 571, 542 plus 6 more as yet unknown.

Row E, headed by Salmon, has cards (L to R) 594, 535, 575, 580, 550, 538, 579, 537, plus 3 more as yet unknown.

Row F, headed by Mantilla, is completely known, and has cards (L to R) 557, 588, 545, 526, 589, 593, 563, 578, 548, 524, 539

Row G, headed by Shirley/Jackson rookie, has cards (L to R) 591, 540, 567, 527, 577, 596, 551, 543, plus 3 more as yet unknown.

We know that at some point within the two half sheets:
1. rows A, B, C, D, and E are in that order.
2. rows A, F, and G are in that order
3. row E is above row A at some point
4. cards 597, 592, and 549 are in the same row
5. card 533 is in column 6 and must be in either row B, C, or D and whichever row that card is located, must be above A at some point
6. card 583 is in same row (to the left of) 569, and is above the row containing card 523.
7. card 598 appears to be above card 595 and 552 is in same row as 532 (532 is left of 552)
8. card 517 is most likely at the end of a row.
9. row G is above either row B or D at some point (based on miscut 591. can't tell if color is grayish or faded red).


My guess, and it is only a guess, is that one half-sheet contains the pattern: A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E. This pattern handles items 1-3 above, plus 9 (if G is above B as I suspect). It is also the same pattern Topps used for one half-sheet in 1965 (both series 5 & 7), as well as 1967 (series 7) and 1969 (series 6).

The second half-sheet pattern must somehow incorporate 533 (meaning that row has to touch row A somewhere). Hope this helps.

Does your information so far fit with the hobby's belief of 43 (44 counting the checklist) SPs appearing on the same rows and 33 DPs on the same rows? If so, would this lead to a belief that SPs were printed 3 times on the 2 sheets and DPs 4 times?

That will look great JollyElm. Great visual impact for sure.Thanks

Great work on this txn!

What we have seen from the partial sheets and misfits does not really indicate 44 SP’a, and some of the specific alleged “SP’s” have been pretty clearly debunked, like McCovey and Williams. I would guess there are two slightly SP’d rows on a full sheet, but we can’t definitively prove any total number yet.

The math has to work out. 44 x 3 + 33 x 4 = 264. There has to be at least 3 SP rows B with Coleman, C with Hoerner and G with Jackson. If there are only 33 SPs then one of the rows, probably G would only be printed twice. If we can place #583 and #598 it would help a lot. A and D are clearly DP rows meaning that Northrup and 571 Roberts are DPs not SPs. I would tend to agree that E with Williams and McCovey is a DP row. I never felt that they were that tough. That would only leave F as an unknown row. This information shows that there are errors in the hobby's list of SPs for 1966 high numbers.

44x3 and 33x4 is not the only way to reach 264. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we have a situation like in 1967 with a possible 2x row. We don't have the evidence to make conclusions on how many times a row appeared at all yet, so it's just conjecture. Will be interesting to see if we can actually recreate a full sheet from this method. We can say the traditional SP list is debunked, but that's about all. We need more top/down miscuts to start working on the columns better while we hunt for the missing row cut clues.

Here's a reimagining of the images from post #20 (with additional information gleaned from other posts)...

Attachment 408158

If anyone has groups of numbers, columns, rows, etc., you wanna see realized, shoot me the specific numbers and how they're situated.

Technical note: the images are small, because there are size constraints involved when uploading them directly from my computer. As this effort moves forward, I can always upload them to flickr and have them displayed hugely here.

Edited to add: I took some of the info posted by Kevvyg1026 to extend the rows outward.

And another...

Attachment 409012

Edited to add: I took some of the info posted by Kevvyg1026 to extend the rows outward.

The McCovey 4 card strip shown in layout 6 is adjacent to the B Williams card shown in layout 1. Card 561 (Choo Choo) can be placed next to Bob Chance, also shown in layout 1.

Howser is in column 3 and therefore must touch (be above) one of the following:584, 559, 547, 560, 575, or 545

Does this work?

Attachment 408840

I continued the Northrup row, too.

Awesome. The two cards between McCovey & Choo Choo are 523 and 542. However, we do not have confirmation yet of which goes where, although I suspect that the proper order is Choo Choo, 523, 542, McCovey.

sorry, meant 525, not 523 under choo choo

typing skills directly affected by amount of coffee consumed before-hand

1966 high # miscuts
 

any guesses?Attachment 408418

Non SP in my opinion. that my start. Scoured ebay for 2 hrs yesterday and only came up with 532 to the left of 552 which we already had.

1966 high # miscuts
 

Here's 597 miscut. I think it is 582 to its left but I am open toAttachment 408753 other possibilities. We now that 597, 592, and 549 are in the same row.

1966 high # miscuts
 

Great find. I consider all of these as non sp's until proven wrong. Agree on 582 roggenburk to the left. Not to many blue base cards in the 7th series.

1966 highs
 

I suspect that all four are in the row headed by Taylor. It would be great to find a miscut (or 2-3) that identifies the cards above/below these four.

.

1966 topps highs
 

Thanks for those miscuts. I can't tell for certain, but the Tiger team miscut may have Perry (598) to its left. The Nicholson miscut has either Franks (537), Tebbetts (552) or a rookie card underneath it. Since we know most of the cards surrounding rookie cards (except for 549 & 553), my suspicion is that it may be Tebbetts. I believe the Mantilla card is showing the top of Shirley/Jackson card (591).

I think you nailed it as Perry, matches up perfectly.

Nice one on Perry call. Do we know who is below Tigers team? That would be next to 595 Jackson.

That would make sense. Those were always 2 of the toughest cards in the set. Now to figure out what row they were in.

Bob Sadowski is below the Tiger’s team card, Orlando McFarlane is to the right of the Tigers team card.

Can #525 Gary Bell be placed next to #546 Siebler under Choo Choo Coleman or is it believed that there may be two separate rows with Coleman? ETA, I get it now, Bell is in the fifth spot on either the Hoerner row or the Taylor row, much more likely the Hoerner row but can't be confirmed yet.

There must be more than one placement of the row with Coleman on the sheet.

I think the Sullivan is new, the McCovey-Williams is already known but I found another example.

Unless I am mistaken, it can only be Siebler, Roggenburk, or Queen to the left of Sullivan.

I think it has to be Roggenburk.

Almost positive that Bell (525) is under Choo Choo and next to Siebler while 542 (Smith) is under Bell and next to 571 (Roberts). That would put Bell in the row with Hoerner Rookie Card (what I call row C). I also suspect that Bell is always under Choo Choo in this sheet configuration.

Based on PoP reports, and the various miscut info I've seen, I suspect that the row pattern on one half-sheet was A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E while on the other is was D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G.

There is evidence that suggests row B was under both row A (northrup) and row G, which is why I prefer this configuration to others.

A = Northrup row
B = Perranowski row
C = Hoerner row
D = Taylor row
E = Salmon row
F = Mantilla row
G = Shirley (591) row.

I am almost positive that the strip 582, 597, 592, 549 is in row D and finishes that row (i.e. Columns 8, 9, 10, & 11) but need to see something to the right of 582 to confirm.

The 3 card sequence 598, 583, 569 is pretty much guaranteed to be in either row B (perranowski) or row C (hoerner) as is the sequence 532, 552.

My guess would be 598 583 and 569 would be in C since the cards below have generally been considered as non SP types. To be proven out though.

I didn’t realize that one had already been discussed, I have a good excuse this time with all of the outages and scans disappearing going on. There are no scans in those posts now.

1966 topps highs
 

Here's a miscut of 553. Posted before, but with the issues over the past week, thought I would post again. Any suggestions about what might be next to it?Attachment 409232

1966 topps highs
 

There are several possibilities. I'm thinking it might be 570, but am open to suggestions.

I have always considered 553 a not very tough get. always off center. How many unknown spots let on the salmon and taylor rows? also knowing that with what cards haven't been placed yet and generally which of those unplaced do folks consider easier or a beckett non sp?

just trying to come at this from another angle. has anyone tried to look for miscut backs for clues?

bill

I've struck out completely on the backs. A tiny sliver of the front is usually enough, due to the color scheme for different teams + the widely different backgrounds at the edges in the posed shot, enough to ID. The backs have to be much further off center to ID which card is adjacent. But then again, I've only found a few and Cliff seems to find 20 a day lol

There are six openings in the Perranowski row, Hoerner row, & Taylor row. There are three openings in both the Salmon & Shirley rows.

However, we have a four-card sequence (582, 597, 592, & 549). I suspect that this sequence is in the Taylor row since none are that hard to acquire (i.e., suspected non-SP). I also suspect that 553 is in this row.

We also have a sequence of 598, 583, & 569 adjacent to each other, with 595 under 598 and 523 under 583.

We have 532 next to 552 and most likely 576 is above 552.

And 517 (checklist) is at the end of a row, and is most likely at end of Perranowski, Hoerner, or Shirley row.

If someone wants to send me the specific card numbers, and where they go, I will be happy to plug the cards into the document I created and post another print sheet layout example. Even if it's just a few cards that are attached. Anything. Just shoot me the proper info and I'll get on it.

1966 high # miscuts
 

I found these two miscuts, and although they don't shed any new light on the 1966 high series print configuration, they do help raise an interesting question. Both of these cards exhibit some marking which highlight that they are at the edge of the sheet.Attachment 409499

Attachment 409500

There are 24 cards whose positions on the sheets are still unknown, and five must occupy an end position (since we know the cards at the end of both the Northrup & Mantilla rows). These cards are: 517, 523, 528, 531, 532, 538, 541, 549, 552, 553, 556, 566, 569, 570, 576, 582, 583, 586, 587, 590, 592, 595, 597, & 598.

Based on miscut information, we know that 517 is one of those five. We can eliminate 523, 532, 582, 583, 592, 595, 597, & 598 from consideration because we know there are cards to the right of those. That leaves 15 possible cards (528, 531, 538, 541, 549, 552, 553, 556, 566, 569, 570, 576, 586, 587, & 590) for the remaining four end positions.

If anyone has miscuts of these cards that show edge of sheet markings, please post!

I hope this one hasn't already been posted. ETA: yep, it was back in post #166, maybe someone can figure it out with a back scan.

I expect Howser to be above 559 Pena, but can not tell for certain from the scan.

Not wanting to lose focus on this great thread, I haven't found anything more yet. I'm trying to look for border lines on the right of cards to maybe pin down all 7 right border cards. I know we have some looking for others, In particular w sox checklist with lines.

1966 topps highs
 

I am fairly certain that the four card strip 582, 597, 592, 549 belongs in the Taylor row because all four are readily available (i.e., non SPs). And although I haven't found 549 with the border marking yet, I suspect it is at the edge of the sheet.

If that four card strip (582, 597, 592, 549) is in the Taylor row, then any miscut under 582, 597, 592, or 549 would allow us to place cards in the Salmon row. The card under 582 is a key card, because if it is Franks (537), then we have strong evidence that the four card strip is indeed in the Taylor row since Franks is in column 8 of the Salmon row.

Now for some real speculation: We have a 3 card strip, 598, 583, 569 with 595 under 598 and 523 under 583. I speculate that 595 & 523 are also in the Taylor row, occupying columns 6 & 7, with 582, 597, 592, 549 occupying columns 8, 9, 10, & 11 in that same row.

It would be very satisfying if a miscut of 523 (Sadowski) was found with 582 (Roggenburk) next to it. Similarly, a miscut of 523 with Jackson (595) on its left would be significant validation, as would a miscut of Jackson (595) having 542 (Smith) on its left. Even a miscut of 569 showing 582 below it would be very helpful information.

If evidence for the above can be found, then this would allow us to place 598, 583, & 569 in the Hoerner row as the cards in columns 6, 7, & 8.

I agree completely, so what assumed non SP's does that leave for the salmon row? I'm thing 531 553 and the checklist.

I think a card by card breakdown, as we did with 67 would be very interesting here. (If already done, I apologize)

Rich

The checklist should be in a sp row since it was also printed during the last print run. Perhaps 587 is in the salmon row as well as 553 and 531

This is a great thread with a lot of contributions from a lot of dedicated folks

Agreed. For once I wish I had a lot of miscut cards!!

Mike

Rich, here is a breakdown (summary) by card.

Row A, headed by Northrup, has 554, 568, 584, 581, 534, 558, 573, 536, 529, 572, and 574. Based on recent ebay POP report (July 23), the average availability for cards in this row was 61.2, with a standard deviation of 19.5. The high was 94, the low 34, and median was 69.

Row B, headed by Perranowski, has cards 555, 562, 559, 564, & 561, plus 6, as yet unidentified cards. I suspect one card is 517, W. Sox variation. The ebay Pop report provides: Avg - 31.2, StD - 12.2, High - 55, low - 18, med - 28, with the large variation driven by the relatively high count of 564 (Chance).

Row C, headed by Hoerner rookie, has cards 544, 565, 547, 546, and 525. The ebay Pop report provides: Avg - 27.2, StD - 3.9, High - 31, low - 21, med - 27

Row D, headed by Taylor, has 585, 530, 560, 571, 542, and most likely 582, 597, 592, and 549, plus two more, as yet unidentified with certainty. The ebay POP report yields Avg - 74.3, StD - 21.2, High - 121, low - 50, med - 74.

Row E, headed by Salmon, has 594, 535, 575, 580, 550, 533, 579, and 537, plus three more (suspected to be either 531, 587, 538, or 553). The ebay POP report yields Avg - 55.4, StD - 19.7, High - 88, low - 42, med - 46.5 (both Adair & Franks have high availability).

Row F, headed by Mantilla, has 557, 588, 545, 526, 589, 593, 563, 578, 548, 524, and 539. The ebay POP report yields Avg - 27.0, StD - 14.8, High - 58, low - 12, med - 21. The Tovar rookie is the low availability card.

Row G, headed by Grant Jackson, has 591, 540, 567, 527, 577, 596, 551, and 543, with three positions as yet unidentified. The ebay POP report yields Avg - 30.9, StD - 13.9, High - 53, low - 11, med - 31. Navarro is the card with lowest availability.

Hope that helps.

The 7th series cards whose positions are still unknown are: 517, 523, 528, 531, 532, 538, 541, 549, 552, 553, 556, 566, 569, 570, 576, 582, 583, 586, 587, 590, 592, 595, 597, & 598.

However, as mentioned before, I strongly suspect that the sequence 582, 597, 592, 549 is in the Taylor row (because of the non SP designations and POP reports). I also suspect that the sequence 598, 583, 569 is in row C (headed by Hoerner) with 595 (under 598) and 523 (under 583) in row D (headed by Taylor

Furthermore, I speculate that 517 (W. Sox checklist) is at end of row B (Perranowski) or row C (Hoerner) because it was also printed in the 6th series printing and should therefore be in a SP row plus the checklist historically appeared near the top of one of the half-sheets (slits).

Based on what we know with certainty, Davis (535), Adair (533), Northrup (554), Williams (580), McCovey (550), and Roberts (571) probably do not deserve the SP designation that current price guides provide whereas 563 (Tovar rc), 527 (Navarro), 539 (Astros RC), and 588 (A's rookies) should be designate as SPs.

Tip of the cap to Kevvyg for the amazing stat-detective work.Really enjoyed watching this unfold. Also, to Cliff for all the critical discoveries and pictures of the miscuts.Thanks. JollyElm that is a great visual for me on that sheet/slit--puts it all on display.And to all the others for their great input ,too.This thread has been my favorite from the beginning.Appreciate everyone!

1966 topps miscut
 

Does any one know what that broken line is at the top of the Sadowski card?Attachment 411427

My opinion is that there is a half sheet with selected rows: Northrup, Salmon, Taylor at least on it and that on that sheet the row with Sadowski is on the top.

bill

That is what I was thinking. I have previously speculated that the pattern used was
(Recall A = Northrup row, B = Perranowski row, C =Hoerner row, etc.)
Slit A: A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E
Slit B: D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G

In a recent post, I speculated that row D contained 595, 523, 582, 597, 592, 549 based on both POP data, as well as some miscut information.

If that Sadowski image is at top of sheet, that would be consistent with my row D speculation and the earlier row configurations on the two slits. It's not proof, but at least it is consistent.

I agree with your slit line up. I think that the 3 rows 4 times and 4 rows 3 times makes sense. I also would submit relative to cards 591 and 540, which according to this are the bottom 2 cards on the B slit model that these cards were highly open to damage at the production level.
When you think about the 7th series cards that command premiums somewhat without star power, 591 561 562 544 and maybe 540 and 590 come to mind.
So is it possible that either slit was produced in a different quantity that the other? With miscuts being in packs, the quality control aspect at that time may have been not as much a focus.
Surprised that when the Topps vault opened that some strips were not made available to help in this interesting effort.

Last one, why is the Piersall 565 always offcut. L to R or diamond. It's not on the border.....

Bill

It's safe to assume each slit was printed in the same quantity as the A and B slits were printed on the same master sheet. What happened during transport from the printers (two trips with backs going to lithographers from a first printer, then to Topps), cutting and packaging operations though probably explains more about many short prints than the sheet/slit arrays, especially in a 4/3 3/4 A/B setup. Edge and corner cards were vulnerable to damage and miscuts but there are casualties within the middle of the sheets that must have happened during cutting and packaging. Some type of cutting pattern most likely had outsize influence.

Thread # 158 and #166 queen and howser. The miscut seems the same, maybe queen is in that G row. It's always been a sleeper tough card along with 586 raymind.

If all the hard cards were printed on the same row, then you could suspect that row was printed twice. However that doesn't appear to be the case. It seems demand issues or production problems due to sheet placement. Hoerner and Jackson are on the end of rows. Could Perry or Tigers Team be on the end of a row too?

i think they are side by side on the hoerner row (we think).

I think the issue we will never solve is the latest discussion on printing issues/quality issues on selected cards and there placement in rows. We have miscuts that show neither 598 perry or 583 tigers is on a border. Also 561 coleman is not either. I also commented that I can never find a 565 piersall, 555 peranoski or 556 queen well centered. This is similar to 1967 shannon (605) which is never centered. Conversely, a lot of the non sp's like 572 573 529 550 523 seem to be mostly well centered when offered. Not sure if this is due to the process or that these cards were on a row/slit that was better centered for cutting. Also while I'm at it. rookie cards 591,544, 524 are more diamond cut that many of the other cards.
I know a lot of these topics can't be answered, but they just add to the mystery and interest of this series.

bill

I believe that the Perranowski row is always above the Hoerner row on both half-slits, so the Bell card can be placed in row C under Choo Choo and next to Siebler. That puts George Smith (542) next to Roberts in row D. The Smith card should be under Bell in three rows but will be at the top of the 2nd half-slit. In other words, Smith is in row D and the pattern across the two half-slits or sheets is:

Slit A: A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E

Slit B: D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G

Well I did an eBay canvass of the highs this AM and got some interesting results, not the least of which is that the overall eBay item count never matches the actual number of items, which was a PITA (I had the same issue with the 1967 high # count).

First, this is the count in numerical card order. The average is 35.8 of each card. I have no idea why #571 (Roberts) would be skewed so much but I checked it three times.

NO COUNT
517 34
523 28
524 16
525 17
526 11
527 9
528 12
529 54
530 61
531 64
532 19
533 73
534 30
535 39
536 72
537 72
538 48
539 18
540 17
541 30
542 65
543 22
544 27
545 13
546 21
547 25
548 49
549 54
550 38
551 33
552 22
553 27
554 39
555 14
556 18
557 16
558 40
559 15
560 43
561 24
562 25
563 8
564 45
565 19
566 17
567 27
568 58
569 19
570 32
571 117
572 65
573 63
574 32
575 31
576 24
577 45
578 26
579 37
580 42
581 77
582 60
583 15
584 32
585 43
586 16
587 71
588 21
589 19
590 29
591 27
592 63
593 52
594 40
595 53
596 18
597 27
598 35

And here is the count in ascending order of the eBay count:

NO COUNT
563 8
527 9
526 11
528 12
545 13
555 14
559 15
583 15
524 16
557 16
586 16
525 17
540 17
566 17
539 18
556 18
596 18
532 19
565 19
569 19
589 19
546 21
588 21
543 22
552 22
561 24
576 24
547 25
562 25
578 26
544 27
553 27
567 27
591 27
597 27
523 28
590 29
534 30
541 30
575 31
570 32
574 32
584 32
551 33
517 34
598 35
579 37
550 38
535 39
554 39
558 40
594 40
580 42
560 43
585 43
564 45
577 45
538 48
548 49
593 52
595 53
529 54
549 54
568 58
582 60
530 61
573 63
592 63
531 64
542 65
572 65
587 71
536 72
537 72
533 73
581 77
571 117

Ok. I added these counts to the ones I've been keeping since May and averaged them. Thus, I have counts performed in early May, late June, early July, mid July, and end July. Please note that the 517 count should only include the W. Sox variation not both.

The results are as follows (note that I put 598, 583, & 569 in row C since I am relatively certain about their positions. I also put 595, 523, 582, 597, 592, & 549 in row D for the same reason):

The results for the various rows for average, stdev, median, high, and low) are as follows:

Row A (all cards known):
Row B (5 cards known)
Row C (8 cards known)
Row D (all known)
Row E (8 cards known)
Row F (all known)
Row G (8 known)

A: 59.6 19.0 66.8 90.0 35.0
B: 28.4 12.9 24.6 52.5 18.3
C: 29.8 5.7 29.9 38.8 20.0
D: 67.1 19.9 67.0 117.3 38.0
E. 54.7 17.9 48.6 86.0 38.8
F: 27.6 15.8 20.8 62.3 12.8
G: 32.2 11.7 34.9 44.8 12.5

The large std dev for row D (Taylor) is driven mostly by the Roberts card (571), which typically has much higher counts than any other card in that row.

The large Std dev for row F (Mantilla) is primarily due to the high counts for both 593 (Camilli) and 548 (Kolb).

And Row B has the Chance card (564), which also typically has almost twice as many cards available as other cards in that row.

Great stuff and I for one am glad you have kept this monthly data. I think this bears out the 3 x 4 and 4 x 3 theory well. 2 variations I'd like to bring up:

559 Pena, blue dot bottom right
582 roggenburk, blue blob in the sky

Both probably on one of the slits v a clean version on the other.
Also looking at 554 Northrup, border frame off center

thx for this data.
bill

1966 topps highs
 

The Perry card also seems to appear both with and without clouds or white blobs in the sky