1991 Topps Baseball Error/Variations question
 

For those that building a master set or have build a master set of the 1991 Topps Baseball Set (excluding Desert Storm). What are you using for the master set checklist?

I am using the Keymans Collectibles and the Baseball Card Variation Checklist Vol. 2. Becketts really does not cover the details enough for me.

What, in your opinion do you consider the complete variation list to consider your respective master set completed?

There is a card listed in the BBCVC Vol.2: #573 Rodriguez that has a logo on the back and no logo on the back. Anyone have a no logo version they can take a picture of and show me? All I ever have seen are various examples of a very faint Topps 40 year logo. Never seen one with what is considered no logo.

Any one variation harder to find than another?

Thanks,

B. T.

1991 Topps Baseball Error/Variations question
 

There is a bigger story to this than just number 573. I’m surprised any publication started recognizing this which is refreshing to hear. I spent decades opening 1991 topps just to try and find as many variations as possible. In doing so I discovered six cards, all of which I personally confirmed exist because I either own or used to own them. You said they were called “no logo” variations. I personally refer to them as bio box variations because the reason these exist is during production the sheet was fed through the press backwards and six players on the sheet have back where manager cards should be and six manager cards have logos where bio boxes should be. As far as I know it only effected the C sheet cards for a very short time. As such, these are very scarce.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...197a558b26.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1991 Topps Baseball Error/Variations question
 

There were six managers cards on the C sheet so this variation would have effected a total of 12 cards. As I said before, I confirmed the six players variations exist, however, I was only ever able to confirm four of the six manager cards. Two of them I never found but I can deduce who they are and it isn’t unreasonable to presume they exist. Here is one of them.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...ae7ebb0ba7.jpg




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

4reals,

Thanks for the pictures and additional insight. Bio box is a much more accurate description. Until your reply, the description of no logo just did not make sense.

Time for a trip back through my dupes in hopes of a stumble-find. Somehow I doubt I will be so lucky though, but I won’t know until I look.

The search for the 6 misprints will be an interesting journey though. Did you end up with multiples or just one-off finds when you did come across them?

Regards,

I have a couple duplicates. Had all my remaining ones graded. Sold all my previous ones for A LOT to a collector who made an offer I couldn’t refuse. I’ll pm you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Depending on your definition of a variation, particularly if you include back differences, I do not think a complete master/super checklist exists for the 1991 set. Dylan has a good list

https://junkwaxgems.wordpress.com/ca...1991-baseball/

Thanks Al,

I am using that site too, I just forgot to include it in my op. It is hard to draw a line as to how far to take the 91 set. I know for sure I won’t chase the print code variations. I have quite a few now and 4reals has opened my eyes to more.

I believe the remaining for me will be hard to come by now and I may just have to draw a proverbial line and call it good.

Thanks,

B. T.

Here are the bio box variation numbers on the C sheet that I have identified. Those with a "C" are confirmed. If you look closely at the number, you can make out the card number of the other card it should have been.

(C) Cal Ripken 150 > matched with 351
(C) Danny Gladden 778 > matched with 321
(C) Rich Rodriguez 573 > matched with 231
(C) Mike Jackson 534 > matched with 639
(C) Oscar Azocar 659 > matched with 261
(C) Bobby Cox (Mgr.) 759 > matched with 294
(C) Joe Torre (Mgr.) 351 > matched with 150
(C) Bob Rodgers (Mgr.) 321 > matched with 778
Doug Rader (Mgr.) 231 > matched with 573
(C) Frank Robinson (Mgr.)639 > matched with 534
Bud Harrelson (Mgr.) 261 > matched with 659
(C) Mike Moore 294 > matched with 759

Here are past pics I took of others. That Ripken should be a pain for Ripken collectors to find.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...d5ba754d0c.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...28edbb943f.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...ce684f2e85.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...c5cd9f2c23.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dang!

You must have busted quite a load of 91’s in order to amass that many cards. How long did this end up taking you? And are you still looking for them today?

Thank you very much for this information. It is awesome what can be found on this site by only asking!

Much appreciated.

B. T.

1991 Topps Baseball Error/Variations question
 

Since the price of junk wax went up over the recent hobby surge I stopped looking. I could get an unopened box for less than $20. Now it’s not worth the cost IMO. Over the last 6-12 months I started focusing on the Desert Shield cards to familiarize myself more with those and see if I could identify any similarities, variations, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And in all of that ripping of 1991 Topps, did you ever come across a vintage card or an expired redemption card?

I remember when this stuff was new - every time I'd go into a LCS (there were a LOT more back then) some one would be saying "my friend in Peoria found a '67 Yaz!" and then someone else would say "My friend in Billings said he pulled the '75 Yount and HIS buddy in Texarkana found a '78 Ryan AND a '71 Munson!" - sounded a lot like the college stories of the mythical girlfriend in another state.

Me? I opened a few boxes and didn't find anything. I always thought with my luck, I'd probably get a '90 checklist.

I actually got a 1990 Joey Meyer. And that’s out of about 30-40 boxes.

So you are saying that I got a chance........ :p

Not a fan of those odds unless the boxes are a buck a piece or less.

Cheers,

About 10 years ago, looking for AB print code variations and the other abundant errors in this set I did pull a 1962 Dallas Green from a wax pack.

I’ve opened well over 100 boxes over the years and only ever came across two, both forgettable. They weren’t stamped or marked in any significant way so into the commons box they went.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When I was a kid, I invariably pulled a Vern Ruhle card out of just about every pack I opened. I must have 50 Ruhle cards kicking around my baseball room somewhere.

A couple of years ago, I did pull a vintage card from a '91 Topps box.
I will let you guess who it was.

If I find my cards, perhaps I will see if I can become the top PSA Vern Ruhle collector. :)

I opened a lot of it back in the day and got a 1988 common.

After this set, Topps did make sure to have any buy backs cards ID'd with a stamp. You had nowhere to go when you pulled a 1989 common as a friend of mine did get.

And as always, if anyone wants me to go through and break out 1991 Variations of any card let me know and I'll go through the data base and make those changes if we have any in the COMC data base.

Rich

I don't think there are any truly complete lists.

I'm not familiar with the Keyman one, but the one at Junkwax gems is excellent.

That being said, my batch of them has cards he doesn't list, and some oddball stuff I'm still needing to look into.

Besides those.....

There's the glow backs and non- glow backs, and some that react a very dark red that's hard to tell given using a blacklight in darkness.
A few that have strands in the cardstock that react. I'm still unsure of these.
And a possible thing where the glosscoat may react greenish under a blacklight.

I really have to find my notes and type them up.

w w w dot keymancollectibles dot com and find the 91 set. He has a number of the variations listed. I incorporated all three; key man, junk wax and BBCVC Vol. 2.

I went back through my 91 dupes and I found a couple Ben McDonalds that have an extremely hard to see, almost invisible to the eye, logo on the back of two of them.

Old Ben may have to be my poor mans missing Topps Logo back card instead of the Rodriguez and others listed in this thread.

Regards,

Just curious but why wouldn't you include them if you're pursuing a master set? They are the very definition of a variation in that Topps made a deliberate change to a card and/or the printing plate.

I have found a handful that are not part of the C* sheet, including Chipper's Draft Pick card (twice). No logo or red area behind the bio information at top.

Well, it comes down to finding them and then paying for them. I’m not inclined to drop a potential grand or more on the remaining cards that are near impossible to find. And the fact that they are not really recognized as error-variations also comes into play. A sampling of the two back errors may be as far as I probably take it.

I have most all but a handful of documented variations. For me, that is the definition of a master set. The others are an excellent find by 4reals but are probably out of reach in many instances. Especially the Ripken.

Other opinions can be different on this subject, and that is ok.

Butch---I generally agree with your points here, especially since I still don't think anyone has a fully agreed upon master set checklist for 1991

But your term " documented" variations is also an elusive standard because whose documentation one chooses to use can vary as well.

In the end we all set our own parameters for what we collect. Nothing wrong with that

Agree, documented is purely subjective in oh so many ways. So, I picked 3, right or wrong, I picked them. And that is what I am going on. I can do no better than that at this point as no company has really stepped up and said... "yeah verily, these are the chosen ones." So I chose myself.

Sorry for the nebulous use of the word documented. It does take on many a definition. Especially in this hobby.

Oh, and opinions regarding this hobby are as plentiful as the variations/errors too, no problems with that at all. --Cheers!


Regards,

B. T.