52 Topps top right corner?

[irv]

Has anyone else noticed this on the Rosen card and many other 1952 Topps cards?
In my observations, if a 52 Topps card is going to have a soft corner, it seems it is always the top right one.
This E-Bay one is definitely rougher than mine but on mine you can see the area in question.
I have noticed this, soft/dinged upper right corner, on a lot of my cards and ones I have purchased but I have also noticed it on quite a few others as well. Was it the way they were packaged or is it just a fluke?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-1...EAAOSw0IZZ2l7f

[jason.1969]

Originally Posted by irv

Has anyone else noticed this on the Rosen card and many other 1952 Topps cards?
In my observations, if a 52 Topps card is going to have a soft corner, it seems it is always the top right one.
This E-Bay one is definitely rougher than mine but on mine you can see the area in question.
I have noticed this, soft/dinged upper right corner, on a lot of my cards and ones I have purchased but I have also noticed it on quite a few others as well. Was it the way they were packaged or is it just a fluke?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-1...EAAOSw0IZZ2l7f

Great mystery. Here is a possible explanation, though I won't even pretend it's definitive.

Before TPG and even top loaders, the chief means of protecting cards was 3x3 plastic sheets. Now let's say the opening for the card was on the left of the card pocket. You'd generally start by angling the card so its bottom right corner easily entered the pocket. But then it was common to crash the top right corner of the card into the sharp sleeve opening and end up with a nick or rip. At least I can say that it happened to me more than once.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[Volod]

Originally Posted by jason.1969

Before TPG and even top loaders, the chief means of protecting cards was 3x3 plastic sheets. Now let's say the opening for the card was on the left of the card pocket. You'd generally start by angling the card so its bottom right corner easily entered the pocket. But then it was common to crash the top right corner of the card into the sharp sleeve opening and end up with a nick or rip. At least I can say that it happened to me more than once.

Good theory - mine is even simpler: most people are right-handed.

[irv]

Originally Posted by jason.1969

Great mystery. Here is a possible explanation, though I won't even pretend it's definitive.

Before TPG and even top loaders, the chief means of protecting cards was 3x3 plastic sheets. Now let's say the opening for the card was on the left of the card pocket. You'd generally start by angling the card so its bottom right corner easily entered the pocket. But then it was common to crash the top right corner of the card into the sharp sleeve opening and end up with a nick or rip. At least I can say that it happened to me more than once.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Volod

Good theory - mine is even simpler: most people are right-handed.

Thanks guys.

I guess there is no real answer or no real theory? Could be like you guys say or it could be something entirely different?
It just seemed odd to me that a lot of cards I look at, the top right corner seems to have issues a lot.

[Bill77]

I think it has to do with the change in size of cards through the 50's. The 53 Bowmans would leave one side of a 52 Topps exposed and the later smaller cards would leave the top and side of the 52 Topps exposed.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Volod

Good theory - mine is even simpler: most people are right-handed.

FINALLY...something for which right-handers are to blame!

[Volod]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

FINALLY...something for which right-handers are to blame!

I knew Billy Martin was still alive!

[irv]

I was informed of this by a very knowledgeable collector/seller. Has anyone else heard this before? I never paid any attention to the numbers (1-80) but it makes sense to me, especially when it comes to the Rosen card.

The answer is damage to the corner at top right was caused by the printing machinery that resulted what is usually called a corner pull. Seen most on one of the top corners, usually the right one and almost always in the first series of 1-80. The flaw in the machinery was corrected later in the printing process.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-...572?rmvSB=true

[Volod]

Originally Posted by irv

I was informed of this by a very knowledgeable collector/seller. Has anyone else heard this before? I never paid any attention to the numbers (1-80) but it makes sense to me, especially when it comes to the Rosen card.

The answer is damage to the corner at top right was caused by the printing machinery that resulted what is usually called a corner pull. Seen most on one of the top corners, usually the right one and almost always in the first series of 1-80. The flaw in the machinery was corrected later in the printing process.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-10-BB-Al-Rosen-PSA-4-5700-/311856063572?rmvSB=true

Maybe I'm missing something, and please correct me if so, but since the cards were printed on sheets, they had no corners until sometime after the printing process, so did your source actually mean the cutting equipment, or perhaps the final collating or packaging of the cards?

[SMPEP]

Al Rosen appeared either in the top row on the center of the sheet (most likely location) or in the top row in the far right corner.

He also appeared in the fourth row either in the top row on the center of the sheet or in the top row far in the far right corner (most likely location).

It is possible that machine damage caused this if the card was in the top row, far right corner AND it is also possible if it was in the center of the sheet. How could it cause damage in the center of the sheet? Because the A and B sheets were printed on one huge sheet on a Lord Balitmore Press that had a built on splitter (a device that cut the big sheet into two "smaller" sheets). Thus this center card would have then been on the top right corner of the smaller sheet.


With those facts stated, I still find the claim inconclusive because the known 1952 Topps sheets show that there were extra wide borders around the edges of the sheet. To get this damage from the pulling machine ... you would have seen much larger damage to the corner of the sheet. Which would have made this very obvious right off the bat ... and presumably would have been quickly corrected.

But I will say, I have seen that corner damage on the Rosen card frequently.
Steve Birmingham probably can shed some light on this for us.

Cheers,
Patrick

[Volod]

Right, perhaps Steve B will weigh in on this. I concur on possible damage to cards on the edge and even in the middle of a sheet, but it seems that the damage claim refers to all cards in the 80-card series, and it's hard to see how that could result.

[Republicaninmass]

I've never heard this, but I do notice those strange corner pulls in the upper right. I have a hoard of one owner 52s with the run 1-80 and I'll pull or post the number that have the pull. I know. IRV Noran has it #40

How aprapo

[irv]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

I've never heard this, but I do notice those strange corner pulls in the upper right. I have a hoard of one owner 52s with the run 1-80 and I'll pull or post the number that have the pull. I know. IRV Noran has it #40

How apropos

[SMPEP]

Irv Noren was located in three spots.

In the third row, last card of the row.

In the fourth row, in the center - last card after the sheets were split.

And in the last row (10th), as the last card of the row and sheet.

Cheers,
Patrick

[SMPEP]

By the way ... all of the cards at the edge of this sheet ended in "0". If there were cards that ended 1-9 with this same blemish it would severly undermine the sheet pulling theory.

Cheers,
Patrick

[glynparson]

I believe it was the way many were stored over the years that leads to that corner being so frequently damaged. This is not just a 1952 phenomenon but seems to be fairly consistent from year to year.

[irv]

I really have no idea what the issue was, I just posted thinking maybe this was talked about before and there was a reasonable explanation for it?

Like I mentioned, maybe it is just a fluke or the way they were stored/handled, but that certainly doesn't seem to be the case with the Rosen card. I can't imagine his card is the only one, however, as it's clear to me there is a story of some sort behind his card.