1958 Topps Series ???

[insidethewrapper]

I was viewing the REA Auction and noticed Lot 1220 showed a 1958 Topps Uncut Sheet of 132 cards from the 2nd Series. I've seen the 2nd Series before listed 111-195 ( minus 145) = 84 different cards, but this sheet has 87 different cards ( it appears that # 145 Ed Bouchee) was replaced at the last minute with a double print of #115 Jim Bunning. It also contains numbers 196,197 & 198. Were these cards part of the 2nd or 3rd series ? Does the 2nd Series go from 111-198 ?
The Team checklists indicate 1st Series 1-88, 2nd Series 89-176, 3rd Series 177-264 etc. So my question is were the 1958 Topps BB cards issued in Series 1 ( 1-88 or 1-110), Series 2 (89-176 or 111-195 or 111-198) ?

[toppcat]

Topps did this starting in 1958. They included the next series checklist in the previous series (starting in 1961 but on the team card backs for the 3 years prior) and then there were either 11 or 22 cards from the "next" series on the sheet. A little enticement to get the kids anticipating the next series. The practice of lagging did not end until 1966.


I cover some of this on my blog (short version): https://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/s...l%20Checklists

Long version: https://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/s...t%20Relativity

I believe in 1958 Topps sold six series using only five press runs using this method. I also think they only put together the last series after signing Musial. (EDIT 9/10/23: It was six press runs.)

[ALR-bishop]

Great info as usual Dave. I try to remember to check your blog every time I have a Topps Q .A great resource

[G1911]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Topps did this starting in 1958. They included the next series checklist in the previous series (starting in 1961 but on the team card backs for the 3 years prior) and then there were either 11 or 22 cards from the "next" series on the sheet. A little enticement to get the kids anticipating the next series. The practice of lagging did not end until 1966.


I cover some of this on my blog (short version): https://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/s...l%20Checklists

Long version: https://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/s...t%20Relativity

I believe in 1958 Topps sold six series using only five press runs using this method. I also think they only put together the last series after signing Musial.

Somehow, I have never come across your site before. This is a gold mine of information!

[insidethewrapper]

Dave: thanks for the information. 45 cards on the 1958 Topps "Series 2 Uncut Sheet" were double printed !( 4 ROWS + Bunning). I never knew that Bunning replaced Bouchee until I seen the uncut sheet.

See enclosed dealer selling sheet from July, 1958. Interesting how the #'s are broken up for sale : (1-88, 89-110,111-176,177-198,199-264,265-286,287-352,353-374,375-440,441-495).

[insidethewrapper]

It is interesting that the Series 1 Team Checklist #44 Washington (top) lists # 145 Ed Bouchee, but Team Checklists ( Philadelphia and Kansas City) released in the 2nd Series omit # 145 altogether.
If you notice the Philadelphia Team Card , Ed Bouchee did make it into the 1958 Topps Set in the Second Row. He was arrested on 1-17-58, admitted to Psychiatric Unit early March, 1958 and discharged on May30th, 1958. Rejoined the Phillies on July 1, 1958.

[ALR-bishop]

This appearance of Bouchee in the early checklist has been discussed some previously in here. I have wondered if a card was produced and pulled, or maybe a proof or prototype card ever existed. I suppose if there ever were such cards something would have turned up by now. Bob Lemke did produce a couple of 58 Bouchee fantasy cards

[ALR-bishop]

Keep this one in my set in the 145 slot

[cardinalcollector]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Keep this one in my set in the 145 slot

Bob sure made some awesome looking cards. I'm partial to the 1956 Topps Charlie Peete, seen by my name.

[JTysver]

[img]1566407874[/img]

[ALR-bishop]

]That one is great. No doubt Ed would not have made it back to MLB today like he did back then




[

[commishbob]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Keep this one in my set in the 145 slot

I did that as well RIP Bob Lemke

[Tedwilliams1918]

1958 mantle error

[Kevvyg1026]

The 2nd series print run has 88 cards (111 to 198, minus 145 but an extra copy of Bunning). So, there are 8 rows of 11 cards each, with each row printed 3x across the full sheet of 264 cards (two half sheets of 132 cards each). That REA slit shows one half of the full sheet.

Similarly, the 3rd series print run has 88 cards (199 to 286), as does that of the 4th series (287 to 374).

The 5th series print run has 66 cards (375 to 440), while the 6th series printing has 55 cards (441 to 495).

The 6th series initially had 55 unique cards but apparently, at some point, cards 443, 446, 450, and 462 were pulled and replaced with additional copies of Musial AS (476) and Mantle (487). So, the later print runs had 3 copies of Musial in the row headed by Jensen and 3 copies of Mantle in the row headed by Spahn, which is probably why those two cards are listed as triple prints.

Based on the miscuts I have seen, I believe that Hardy (446) & Ward (450) were the cards that were replaced by the additional Mantle cards in columns 10 & 11 whereas Harrell (443) and Geiger (462) were the cards replaced by the additional Musial cards in columns 10 & 11.

This last series seems to be plagued by defects (scratches) on the front of the cards, so I wonder if the printing plates were damaged at some point during the print run.

I have not yet completely determined the slit pattern for the 6th series.

[Tedwilliams1918]

Here’s a picture of a bunch of my mantles with the gap in the bio I have been collecting this card for 3 years and buy anyone I see on the spot

[Tedwilliams1918]

There’s also 7 other 1958s like mantle with the same error all touching each other on the sheet I have 5/8 of these cards

Susce
Slaughter
Mantle
Virdon
Jolly
Drabowsky
Jensen
H. Sullivan

[toppcat]

A big question is whether the 3X AS cards of Mantle and Musial were replaced on both slits or just one of them. Impossible to tell unless some print scraps etc show up.. It would be kind of weird they didn't know they needed a Mantle AS card despite Musial's signing status. Mick was in the 2nd series so clearly signed with Topps for '58. I wonder if the extra Mick's are related to the plates suffering damage in light of Kevvyg1026's observations. The Musial AS's are right below the Mantle's I believe, so that area could have had damage and which also suggests only one slit was affected.

[Tedwilliams1918]

Dave H can you see my 1958 mantles I posted? Someone told me you were the man when it comes to 1958 sheets as I posted above this same error happened to 7 other players all touching mantle #150 on the sheet

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Tedwilliams1918

Dave H can you see my 1958 mantles I posted? Someone told me you were the man when it comes to 1958 sheets as I posted above this same error happened to 7 other players all touching mantle #150 on the sheet

What you see here is what I know basically re 1958 sheets, Kevvyg10826 and a couple of other stalwarts are the real sheet whisperers. I'd say those Mantle's are just print errors that hit about 6 different cards. I do have one of the 2nd series Mantle slits scanned-he's a DP in the right-most column. This is the same series where Bouchee was replaced by an extra Bunning.

[Kevvyg1026]

Besides being above the Musial AS row, the row with the Mantle AS triple is also above Valetinetti (so the row headed by Semproch) and is also below the row with the Musial AS triple. So, the row with the Mantle AS is both above and below two different rows.

Similarly, the row with the Musial AS is both above and below two different rows. This is one reason I am perplexed about the pattern used for the two slits.

I initially thought the five unique rows were distributed across the sheet as four rows 5x, with one row 4x. I wonder, however, because of the miscuts available, if the sheet had two rows 6x, and three rows 4x.

[toppcat]

Looking at those sheet again, why on earth did they use the black and pink backgrounds at all?! Fugly.