1968 Topps Baseball Design

[onlyvintage62]

I know we are speculating but what do you think drove Topps to change the 1968 Baeball Design after thr first series. I mean there had to be some reason. Was it sales, feedback.

Just curious as to your opinions.

[Harliduck]

I'm just about done with that set now, and never noticed that. I obviously have no idea, although I like the stronger "burlappy" look of the first series better than the toned down rest of the set. Maybe I am in the minority.

Thanks for posting this, again, I had no idea and didn't notice it...

[Sean]

I don't know what changed in the '68 Topps set, and in this forum I'll bet I'm not the only one.
Can you show us an example?

[Chris Counts]

I like the second design better than the first, but how about putting this in the post-war section?

[bobsbbcards]

I like the wider-meshed burlap of the 1st series as well.

[toppcat]

I've always wondered if they had issues with the brown color in the first series. Brown seems to have caused Topps some issues over the years and juts a WAG but it does seem odd. They also changed the look of Football in '69 between series 1 and 2 from full bleed to white borders for some reason, so someone at Topps (Ben Solomon most likely) must not have liked the original look of each set.

[ALR-bishop]

In 1968 Topps also produced a special run of some of it's baseball, football and hot rod cards for a Milton Bradley Win A Card board game. There were 76 cards in the baseball subset which had the same fronts as their regular set counterparts, except for 49 Brinkman and 66 Cox, which have yellow team names. They are often treated as variations to the regular 68 set, but in fact are just MB cards

The chief way to tell the difference between the MB cards and their regular counterparts are the backs. MB card backs have light yellow as opposed to orange/gold backs. However, this phenomena is sometimes repeated in higher series regular cards which occasionally are offered, incorrectly, as MB cards. The game cards go no higher than card 195.

Back to topic. There is one variation to the MB baseball set. Card 107, the second checklist can be found with either wide or fine mesh as in the different series examples above. Meaning you really need 77 cards to have a full MB set...and you may not get it by buying a complete game.

I owe knowing about this variation and getting one, to MB master collector Carlton Miller:

[savedfrommyspokes]

Dr. Miller is one collector who has likely forgotten more about MB cards than most collectors will ever know....he is also very willing to share his knowledge as he has been a great source of information for me too.

[cardinalcollector]

When I was buying packs of 1970 Topps cards I noticed that the 1st series did not have a vertical white line between the name of the player and his position.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1970-Topps-1...item51a8ba0d55

The remainder of the set does have this vertical white line added. An exception may exist for players with a long name.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1970-Topps-2...item35c4b25a49

Has anyone else noticed this?

Randy

[toppcat]

1st series 67's are missing the dot between the players name and position.

[cardinalcollector]

Hi Dave, I knew there was another one, but I couldn't come up with it.

[goheels]

Thanks for the kind words, Al and Larry. A slight correction here--Topps 1968 Milton Bradley is not a set of 76 with one variation but rather a set of 77 with no variations. To be technical, a variation exists when a card is corrected. These two checklist cards are separate and distinct, and were not corrected. The tan broad mesh ("burlap") CL #107 MB card is at the far left end of a row of eleven cards, as is the brown fine mesh ("mesh") CL MB. The burlap CL 107 is adjacent to a Don Wilson #77 card and the mesh CL 107 is adjacent to a Dodgers Team #168 in both the regular and MB series. For both the regular and MB cards, a severe left off center checklist card with a large right side border can be matched with the extreme left of a Wilson or Dodgers team card (with good eyes and a magnifying glass!). The crosshatch has a distinct pattern.
In the full MB set, four rows of BB burlap mesh 1st series cards (including the 107 CL) and three rows of BB mesh cards (44 + 33) as well as 33 1967 Topps FB cards and 22 Hot Rod cards made up a half sheet of 132 cards. Huggins and Scott has a very nice set of all 77 BB cards coming up in their April 2013 auction with more information on the set.
https://mar12.hugginsandscott.com/cg...l?itemid=55671


Both the Colavito cards like the two separate MB checklists are at the very left of a row, with this off centering you can see both have a white left border, as do badly right off centered CL cards. The MB is pictured first, with a bottom border (top of a hot rod or football card) that is unique to the MB cards.

The third picture shows side by side, MB with the yellow back is on the left, the regular card is on the right. Shadowing isn't great here but under good light there clearly is a distinct color difference.

[ALR-bishop]

I stand corrected. Carlton has been great in sharing info here and on CU

[savedfrommyspokes]

Carlton, Have you seen or do you know of a full uncut sheet of these 67-68 MB cards?

[goheels]

I have never seen a half sheet of 132, or a proof sheet for that matter, of the Topps Milton Bradley 1968 set.

There isn't one at Milton Bradley. I have spent some time many years ago in their archives. Some of the old hands there involved in the game are long gone. Ralph Shea (MB president during the 1960s) and his son are both deceased. I asked his son before he died about a sheet and he wasn't aware of one. Mr. Shea was a baseball nut, his son not quite as much.

I am not aware of one at Topps either. When they had their massive Topps archive fire sale they didn't have any MB items. Remember that this game was very short lived with a limited print run. Also, after this collaboration flopped, Topps wasn't too happy about the other black and white Milton Bradley cards produced in 1969, 1970, and 1972. Milton Bradley put out a cheapo set in 1984 just before their merger with Hasbro, who killed any further baseball projects and began steering toys towards electronics.

No one has really written much about this set. I never saw any articles in the old stuff like The Trader Speaks, The Sport Hobbyist, and amazingly the set was left out of the first modern guide--Bert Sugar's Sports Collectibles Bible (1975).
It was ignored until Lemke put it in his book about 5 years ago.

I am 95% done with putting a virtual sheet together. I hope to publish that in a blog or an article for a hobby journal in the coming months.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

In 1968 Topps also produced a special run of some of it's baseball, football and hot rod cards for a Milton Bradley Win A Card board game. There were 76 cards in the baseball subset which had the same fronts as their regular set counterparts, except for 49 Brinkman and 66 Cox, which have yellow team names. They are often treated as variations to the regular 68 set, but in fact are just MB cards.

As a v & e collector, I have to ask, is this a verifiable fact? I have never heard this explanation for those variations before. You'd think someone at Becketts, etc., would've made this distinction before.

[ALR-bishop]

Darren-- I think Bob Lemke would agree and believe Carlton above does too. I have them in both my regular 68 set and my MB set, but they all 4 have MB backs. If you have them, compare the backs to other backs from that series. They will be dull yellow versus yellow/orange. You could view the whole MB set as variations of the regular 68 set. Sort of like the 82 Topps Blackless set, which I also have, is listed separately in SCD, even though they are all just misprints from the regular 82 set. Carlton might not agree with that though :-) The MB set was an intentional separate print run. The Blackless were a printing mistake

I am also a long time variant collector

[goheels]

I hope these four pictures will explain some differences. Very little has been written about these obscure and rare Milton Bradley cards. The lack of info to date stems from three things: rarity; lack of cataloging; and limited info about 1968 backs in the regular sets. To be fair, the colors are subtle and the shadings are very similar. The simplistic and inaccurate response is to say, "well they all look a little yellow."

In the bottom scan, the Dick Lines cards come from the 68 4th series. In 1968 Topps used two types of stock, the typical light gold used in series 1-7, seen on the left, and also a sunflower color seen on the right, only in series 4-6. This lighter sunflower color is closer to the yellow stock used in the MB cards, but still darker and more orange/gold than yellow to the naked eye. I have boxes of 68s and in those 4-6 series it is a 50/50 split between stock backs. Like the 1956 Topps white/gray backs, there is no different value for scarcity.

In the fourth picture, look closely at the two ovals containing the bio above and the cartoon below. The sunflower stock oval on the right has a white bleached background. The standard golden Lines card has the dingy gray cardboard color seen in all 7 series. The card on the right is not an MB but on ebay some of these cards have been sold as "yellow backs". Incorrect.

The first set of photos compares a Merritt MB with the Lines sunflower stock card. Notice that the MB has the usual gray oval background, not the bleached white.

The second back photo shows two Merritt MBs flanking a regular Merritt. The picture doesn't show it well, but all three cartoons have the gray color, not the bleached white. The MBs are of slightly different shadings, but clearly are both more yellow and not gold.

The third front scan shows the same MBs flanking the regular. Note that the colors are a little more vivid. This isn't the distinguishing mark, but if you have a better condition MB (good luck finding in EX or above, most were handled roughly by 10 year olds in a game) the color strike is much deeper. You can only appreciate this in person, and scans don't really convey that. At your next show look at the graded Cox/Brinkmans and you will see a deeper, sharper picture than the regular card of comparable grade.

The only cards in the first two series that have a yellow back are the 77 MBs, 44 from the first series and 33 from the second.

Another place that shows some pretty clear pictures of Cox and Brinkman cards is the Huggins and Scott website. They have sold several Win a Card games over the years and the closeup pictures are good. Same goes for their current auction, which has a full 77 baseball card set up for sale in April. You can't tell MBs from the front, other than the Cox/Brinkman with the yellow team letters or an off-centered card with a football/hot rod white border, but on a good scan you might appreciate the richness of the picture.

To answer Al's question, I don't think that the MB cards are part of the 1968 Topps master set, because you couldn't get them in a wax pack or vending set, only in a rare game. You could get variations like the #10 Lonborg/Lonberg or a #400 WL McCormick like any other card in a pack or vending. I wouldn't consider the 1967 Maris Yankees card part of a 67 master set for that reason; it was a proof card and not issued in the set. The Topps MBs are not proof cards, just an obscure and poorly appreciated set in its own right.

[ALR-bishop]

I was only kidding a little about the variation theme. Unlike the MBs, the 1982 Topps Blackless cards made their way into the hobby via packs.

But some check listed Topps issues did enter the market directly rather than packs. Most recently was the 2012 Topps Heritage Update, but there were numerous send away for a card or set of cards in the 80s. The only things I can think of pre 1980 were the 1973 Reprints of 1953 cards and possibly the 1971 Greatest Moments set. Some people say they came in packs but I am not aware of anyone coming up with a pack or wrapper so far ( there is one empty box I have seen at auction). Plus some variations may exist as a function of the appearance of cards only in factory sets.

As usual Carlton, a great tutorial on MBs specifically and the 68 set in general

I do agree on the 1967 Maris proof, but if you pursue "master" sets you have to have one

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[goheels]

Then to be consistent a master set of 68s should include all 77 MB baseball cards or none at all.

Awesome 67 Maris.

71 Topps finest one of the neatest sets ever.

Do you have any pics of the 1973 reprint set?

[savedfrommyspokes]

Carlton, here is an example of the JRobby from the 73 53 reprint set

[ALR-bishop]

The 1973 set may have been a joke at a Topps function. I say that because 3 of the 8 cards in the set incorrectly identify the player pictured:

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[goheels]

Quoting from Bert Randolph Sugar's work, 2nd edition (1977):

"No. 107 issued with "course" (sic) or "fine" 'cloth' background on front.

No. 179 issued with or without sentence at end of biography: "Bill was used sparingly but still"

No. 258 issued with '1968 Rookie Stars' printed in orange or red.

No. 278 issued with copyright printed on left or right side.

No. 454 issued with two cropping forms of picture of Frank Robinson.

No. 518 issued with No.539 listed as American League or Major League Rookies.

No scarcities."

I think my wife might have tossed my first edition I can't find it. I know the second was heavily corrected between 1975 and 1977.

The managing editor of this edition? The brilliant Keith Olbermann.

This book was a quantum leap forward for the hobby.

Still, here is what they got right and didn't (IMHO):

Fluffed on the 400 White Team Letters McCormick.

Ditto for 49 YTL Brinkman and 66 YTL Cox.

Missed on #10 Lonborg/Lonberg on back.

Probably got it right on the Stoneman card #179. I have been looking for that one since the late 1970s and have never seen one. If anyone has a card without that last line I would love to see (or buy) it.

I am still not sold on the red/orange rookies after years of scrutiny.

All seven 1968 checklists have cropping changes. The 67 Kaat is subtle but it's there. The Kaat with a little more room between the cap and inset has a difference on the back. That card has the "T.C.G." end under the box for 109 Campaneris. The Kaat with the lesser room between the cap and inset has the "T.C.G." end just before that box.

All Topps checklists between 1961 and 1972 had two variations. Not so in 1973 because they did not print a "preview" checklist enticing kids to buy the next series.

[ALR-bishop]

[IMG][/IMG]

[ALR-bishop]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[cardinalcollector]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

As a v & e collector, I have to ask, is this a verifiable fact? I have never heard this explanation for those variations before. You'd think someone at Becketts, etc., would've made this distinction before.

The Cox and Brinkman variations definitely came from the MB set. This has been common knowledge for years among serious MB collectors.

Beckett is not the best source for accurate information along these lines. I have cataloged over 500 mistakes, errors, omissions, and duplication etc. from their last alphabetical checklist, and that was ONLY Cardinals. Most of these mistakes still exist in their online database. Anybody with a common name such as Jack Taylor (or John), or Craig Wilson, are almost guaranteed to be combined with everybody who had that name. I used to inform them of these mistakes years ago, but quit because they corrected very few of the errors.

As a side note, I discovered the 1968 Topps Mike McCormick variation in 1986 and was given credit from Ralph Nozaki in his Baseball Hobby News column.

[ALR-bishop]

And to think we knew you when Randy :-). Neat hobby story.

Agree on Beckett and already miss Bob Lemke at SCD.

As for MBs, Carlton is The Man

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by cardinalcollector

As a side note, I discovered the 1968 Topps Mike McCormick variation in 1986 and was given credit from Ralph Nozaki in his Baseball Hobby News column.

That's a great discovery! Any chance of having an extra McCormick to trade?

[cardinalcollector]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

And to think we knew you when Randy :-). Neat hobby story.

Agree on Beckett and already miss Bob Lemke at SCD.

As for MBs, Carlton is The Man

Thanks Al, My Dad actually bought me the "Win-a-Card" game back in 1968. We lived in St. Louis and Bob Gibson was my favorite player. When I opened the game I remember my Dad saying "now don't be disappointed if Gibson isn't in there, there is only so many cards.......and then he showed up, a bright beautiful 1968 Topps #100 Bob Gibson. I remember to this day the look on my Dad's face, like divine intervention was involved.

[cardinalcollector]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

That's a great discovery! Any chance of having an extra McCormick to trade?

Sorry Darren, I don't even have one myself now.

[goheels]

Neat story, Randy. We were Braves fans and I got three Aarons in the first game I ever got. Thanks, Dad!

Still have all the cards from my original game but don't have that particular game board.

Hope this picture brings back some good memories for you.

[paul]

Here's my favorite 1968 Topps card. I wish I could find one that had all the colors applied to it.

[cardinalcollector]

Great card Paul, here's mine, from the same sheet

[cardinalcollector]

Originally Posted by goheels

Neat story, Randy. We were Braves fans and I got three Aarons in the first game I ever got. Thanks, Dad!

Still have all the cards from my original game but don't have that particular game board.

Hope this picture brings back some good memories for you.

Great pic Carlton, thanks. That Cardinal on the box front always reminded me of Mike Shannon and/or Phil Gagliano. I'm sure its just a generic Cardinal though.

[goheels]

Six Eddie Brinkman 1968 cards in chronological order:

1. Regular Brinkman, gold back, white letters, Jan-Feb 1968
2. O pee chee Brinkman, brown back, white letters, Jan-Feb 1968
3. Topps Milton Bradley Brinkman, yellow back, yellow letters, Apr 1968

The card is a beauty, looks flawless

4. Topps Milton Bradley Brinkman, yellow back, yellow letters, Apr 1968

Eddie was great with autographs before his untimely death in 2008. Had a smile as wide as the Mississippi when he signed this.

5. Topps Milton Bradley Brinkman/Winston Hill miscut, yellow back, yellow letters, Apr 1968.

One of my favorite MB cards. I call it the "missing link".

6. Topps Venezuelan Brinkman, brown mustard back, yellow letters, ? in 1968.

Note also the yellow letters!

Between Jan/Feb 1968 and the production of the MB cards in April, Topps corrected a huge mistake they made with the white letter Brinkman and Cox. Unlike all the other 1968 Washington Senators cards, those were the only two that did not have yellow letters. In the first series, the Ed Stroud #31 and Senators rookies #96 are always found with the proper yellow letters.

They continued to get it right with the Venezuelan issue. I am not an expert on that series but I assume they were produced around mid Spring.

In 1968 there were 10 different color schemes for the position/team circle on the front. The Giants also had the green circle/yellow letter scheme. Perhaps the same person who didn't tint in the Cox and Brinkman in series 1 decided to reprise his error in the 5th series with the #400 McCormick card.

I have looked a long time for 1968 Senators and Giants cards with white letters and haven't found any. I noticed the yellow letters on the Cox/Brinkman cards in the first MB game I got. It always bothered me that they were different from the regular 68s in my collection.

That would be a pretty good clinical definition of obsessive compulsive disorder.

[ALR-bishop]

Really a neat item Carlton.

And you certainly do have a disorder, but it is one shared by several folks around these parts

[savedfrommyspokes]

Speaking of 1968 Topps, any ideas on why Topps did not include a team card for all of the teams for this year? Leaving out two popular teams from the north east area, and one popular team from the mid west does not make a lot of sense as these two areas were (are) two of the stronger regional areas of collectors. I can understand why the Astros were not included as there were apparently licensing issues with the team name (and logo). But why were the others excluded?

[cardinalcollector]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Really a neat item Carlton.

And you certainly do have a disorder, but it is one shared by several folks around these parts

What is this disorder you speak of? He seems perfectly normal to me

[goheels]

The lack of yellow tint in these two circles has bothered me since 1970.

I tell my patients the difference between obsessive compulsive personality and disorder is that the latter affects relationships and might include too much spending.

So yes, Al, most people on this board and diehard variation collectors could use 20 mg of paroxetine.

[JollyElm]

My scan comes across very dark orangey, but in person both of these cards jump out for their yellowness as compared to the other cards on the page. The Colavito has the same miscut as the example in this thread. I believe these both may be Milton Bradley cards, but I am brand new to this game. Carlton and Al, what do you guys think?


After further thought, the scan really hides the true color features, so I added this new scan. For the sake of comparison, here are the same 2 cards bookending a non-Milton Bradley Seaver card:

[goheels]

Above average condition MBs, very nice. This set is horrible for centering, like the Colavito. If that Stottlemyre is a 6 then it is a really nice card. It would stand as the second best one graded to date (PSA: 3 5s, one 6, one 7; Beckett one 6). Considering it passed through the hands of an 8 year old...

[goheels]

Strange card from my 1968 Topps Milton Bradley autograph collection. However, I do not know if the autograph is original or autopenned.

Definite MB, look at the white border at the bottom. The back is yellow and definitely an MB.

The color looks washed out. I have a few other MBs that look like this.

Saw this in a shop in the 90s and snatched it immediately. It has not been exposed to the sun. Welcome any and all comments!

[savedfrommyspokes]

Carlton, IMO (and w/o card in hand), it appears to not be signed by Gibson himself. Very neat card though.