1966 Topps High's - Any uncut sheets or partial sheets known?

[BillP]

Originally Posted by BillP

Same with this 12 card block. If the Northrup row is above the mantilla row then these 2 8 and 12 card sheets fit, but we know that the northrup row is above the Perranoski row,
So these have to be separate blocks of a sheet.

Ok, last post for the afternoon on this (I promise), very interesting stuff though. I think from all the input I believe this is the row sequence:
A - Northrup
B - Taylor
C - Salmon
A - Northrup
D - Perranoski
E - Hoerner
B - Taylor
C - Salmon
A - Northrup
F - Mantilla
g - Jackson/Shirley on the bottom corner and open to damage etc.

This sequence includes the input of the 8 card and 12 card sheets and what we know from the miscuts that have been researched.

Other tidbits: Tigers Team/McFarlane has to be in the Hoerner row, so does Perry. That puts Sadowski and Jackson in the taylor row s well.

[mikemb]

Originally Posted by BillP

Ok, last post for the afternoon on this (I promise),

No! Keep ostimg. This is a great thread.

I looked at all my 66 high numbers and no miscuts. First time I wish I had some.

Mike

[BillP]

Originally Posted by mikemb

No! Keep ostimg. This is a great thread.

I looked at all my 66 high numbers and no miscuts. First time I wish I had some.

Mike

Thx Mike, others have done more than me I just had some time to go over all the threads. One takeaway is that 550 Mccovery is not an sp. 554 northrup is also not an sp. 563 twins rookies is also 562 snyder and via recent pricing these last 2 make sense. Mccovey pricing may just be star power.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by BillP

Thx Mike, others have done more than me I just had some time to go over all the threads. One takeaway is that 550 Mccovery is not an sp. 554 northrup is also not an sp. 563 twins rookies is also 562 snyder and via recent pricing these last 2 make sense. Mccovey pricing may just be star power.

This seems to be the case. Snyder used to be considered a SP but in recent years has had that designation removed in most checklists and guides. Looks like the original judgement was probably correct for him, though the 90's guides used to seem to think there were different tiers of SP'ing as well that I don't think is true at all, and which I think the miscuts and partial blocks we've found in this thread indicate.

Building most of my set in the Bay Area via card shows c. 2001-2005, McCovey sure seemed tough, and Perry was the #1 to get. Probably local bias on the McCovey front; I do suspect we will find Perry is a probable SP but not to the overhyped levels 598 and 591's reputations suggest...

This has become a fantastic thread, thank you all. I heard from 3 more lower grade set collectors who report nothing but a single Coleman miscut that "might be Chance" in their stacks; fitting my card earlier and the other one that I think Cliff posted.

[Cliff Bowman]

Never mind, I screwed up royally on this post.

[BillP]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

When I ran across this miscut 1966 Jimmy Piersall I compared the sliver to every card from 523 to 598 and concluded that it could only be Dick Green, but I was hesitant to post it out of fear of doubt. But after seeing the proposed layout of the sheet and seeing that Piersall is projected to be on the row above the row with Dick Green I figured it would be safe to throw it out there.

Great, i think we are about 5 miscuts from solving this.

[JollyElm]

But that sliver doesn't show the black lined border. And that little area of white doesn't seem to match Green's top either. Is there any other possible card it could be? Could it be extraneous stuff at the very bottom of the print sheet?

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by BillP

Ok, last post for the afternoon on this (I promise), very interesting stuff though. I think from all the input I believe this is the row sequence:

E - Hoerner
B - Taylor

I have a scan of a miscut Jimmy Piersall with what I am positive is a sliver of the top of the Dick Green under it but I was hesitant to post it, but it now makes sense with your sequence so I will post it tonight.