81 Fleer new variation.
 

Finished going through my "new" batch of 81 fleer that I bought for a few variations and making a checklist/spreadsheet for the set.

I was surprised that this one didn't seem to be on any lists. It's not exactly a trivial one. And it's on a card that appears to be a later printing.

There are hundreds of trivial constant varieties, that I'm pretty sure nobody else saves. Except whoever had the batch I bought.

https://www.net54baseball.com/pictur...ictureid=30351

If you run across a 1981 Fleer Tim Stoddard with the last D in his name missing on the front as ‘TIM STODDAR’ I will pay a a King’s ransom for it. I’ll post a scan tonight.

Now you guys are going to make me run through my '81 Fleers, aren't you?

When does a card pass from being a print defect to a "variation"? Does it have to be reoccurring and then it's a variation? I'm not trying to be smart, I really want to know.

In all seriousness it depends on who the submitter is if you are talking recognized by the grading companies.

Otherwise it is something that we all debate about without coming to a real answer that the hobby as a whole agrees on.

Steve: Which card are you referring to ? Delete, I see it now on my computer.

This is what the 1981 Fleer Tim Stoddard missing the last D looks like, it was to the left of the blown out Harold Baines on the 132 card uncut sheet. ETA I don't know if the Bob Lacey to the right of Baines was also affected.

Didn't have any of those.

It really does depend on who you ask.
Some only count intentional corrections of errors. (Or less commonly intentional errors created while fixing errors in other cards)

There are a lot of recurring printing varieties that are due to differences between say the first blue plate and the second or third or... Lots of plates to produce millions of something.

Some may not be intentional, like the 91 Topps with backs that glow under UV or not. That might be just cards from a different printer who used a different ink.

Then there's a ton of stuff that has to be filed under maybe? Like the Upper Deck cards using hologram foil from a different set or year.
Or 93 upper deck where the gloss on the back comes three ways for a portion of the set.
Gloss only over the picture
Gloss over the entire back.
Gloss over just the picture AND an additional layer covering the entire back.


This particular card would technically be a print defect, because of the likely cause being a damaged mask used to produce the red plate. But like many, if it's a big enough difference it usually gets considered.

The hundreds of trivial ones are interesting to me, but are mostly caused by dust or debris in the equipment or room during the phase when the negatives used to create the mask were made. I've found them on nearly every card, some are specific to a press run, others are constant throughout.

There is an odd effect I've found on many where the halftone appears to be lines of varying thickness instead of dots. I'm still not real sure about those, because there were also a handful that looked somewhere in between. (Unlike 88 Score where the angle of the halftone pattern changed)

A couple other oddities I didn't scan yet, and may have trouble locating again.

A fiber similar to the pointing hands that is in blue. And which appears in different places on the card. mostly consistent, except for moving a bit between one run and the next.

A card with a "white" dot in the background on the left side. But it has a halftone dot pattern in blue, which doesn't line up with the rest of the blue pattern. To me it appears to have been done by hand on the mask as it carries over between print runs. An intentional repair that's so small it's hard to even notice at all. Some really fine work by the stripping dept, less so by the camera dept. And why didn't they fix the hundreds of other random dots and specks?

I have listed this variation on ebay (no successful sales) probably a dozen times since 2007ish. I pulled about 25% COR to 75% ERR ratio from several 5000ct boxes of 1981 Fleer. Pretty sure I have 6-10 pairs still.

See Dwayne Henry's card for a related unlisted variation.

Was aware of and have Baines. Did not know about Stoddard. Is it harder to find than Baines ? They would seem to exist in equal numbers, unless like Puhl in 86 it was more likely Baines was kept and Stoddard pitched ( pun not intended)

There have been some good debates on what is and or what should be a variation in threads in here. Lemke tried to restore some order but it is chaos now. We need someone in charge of that issue, a hobby czar :)

Is the variation the red bleeding ink in the name? If so I’ve got a million cards with variations.

It's not bleeding, it's red printed as part of the name for one small area. On all the normal cards the name is only in black.
The edges of the lettering a just as clear as on the black.

I have a lot of overinked cards, and this isn't one.

That's interesting. I finally went and had a look on COMC, and all but one there has the red. Looks like that mask damage happened fairly early and never got fixed.

Yes, I think it’s the same deal as the 1986 Topps Clemens-Seaver-Puhl Blue Streak, most 86 Topps Clemens and Seaver cards were saved over the past 35 years but commons like Puhl (I hope he isn’t a member here :eek:) got tossed for lack of storage space. I would imagine MANY 1981 Fleer commons have been tossed in the last 40 years but cards such as the Baines rookies were saved. I have seen 5 to 10 of the Baines since I was aware of it but those are the only Stoddard, Reuss, and Bomback cards I have seen. I don’t know if a Bob Lacey exists.

I nominate you. :cool:

Since the catalogs are gone and PSA is making the variant decisions these days we need a graded collector type, maybe someone who has been a PSA Collector of The Year to take the lead. Who do we know like that ?

At the current price levels I don't think you'll find anyone.

I found one currently on the COMC Web site and created a separate listing for that card. I think the others are not the "Red" version but if someone wants to look and see if I missed any please send a Correction Request in.

I looked a week or so ago, and there seemed to be one maybe two normal ones and about 6 red ones.

As noted, my eyes aren't that good so send either correction requests or Email me (preferred to DM) the ID #'s and I'll fix them

Rich

I love that I now know there are more of these out there.

FRANK THOMAS WHO?? :cool::cool::cool:



https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/GAsAA...QT/s-l1600.png

I am glad to have a Baines PD as well but am also happy I have the who guy PD too. One of the few graded cards I have kept locked up

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albu...080&fit=bounds


But I leave this one ungraded

https://hosting.photobucket.com/albu...080&fit=bounds

I just recently started re-visiting this set. In '81 my friends and I were really excited that we would have options besides Topps and when all the errors and variations were being discovered it only added to the excitement. With prices of my pre-war and golden age interests leaving the stratosphere, I decided to work on some less expensive items and finally complete this set. I pretty much just need variations; my list is below. I can trade or buy (have plenty of '81's including variations).


#24 Saucier – Kevin on back
#114 Lopes – Finger on back
#177 Dempsey – finger on front
#215 Bonham – finger on back
#419 Jefferson – Blue Jays on back
#644 Checklist - #202 “George Foster”
#652 Checklist – includes #483 Aurelio Lopez
#659 Checklist – last # on front is 551

Thanks

I'll bump this thread to say this post motivated me to dive into the madness of '81 Fleer. I've run down these along with the ton of other errors, reverse negatives, etc. I had forgotten about the Baines and Stoddard cards. Maybe someday on those! It's been a fun journey and not overly expensive.

Well, this thread made me look at my 1981 Fleer cards for the first time in many years. No Stoddard error in my cards, so no King's Ransom for me. I remember when these cards came out I was searching for the variations that were published back then. The Craig Nettles card was the valuable one and a friend of mine told me there was a 7-11 in town that had a lot of boxes of these cards with the variations. I went down there and bought 3 boxes I think with the early variations. Nettles was selling for about $10 I think at the time, and I looked in the price guides and some 1959 Mays and Mantle cards I needed were selling for about the same price. So I put an ad in SCD and offered Nettles for Mays or Mantle, and I ended up making trades for both those cards (may have been All-Star version of the cards, I can't remember). I also remember needing only Lopes in the hand versions and buying it for $1.50 at a show and feeling like an idiot. That purchase kind of stopped me from chasing all these variations, though I still save them when I get them, just don't hunt them anymore.

Sorry to hear you have lost your path Troy :)