Reconstructing the 1963 Topps 6th and 7th Series Sheets

[BillP]

Cliff or others, how would one submit the good work on the 63 high series to beckett to get the publications aligned with the fact that there are no sp's here? Looks like Cliff has nailed them all. So if there is other information that we don't know about driving 1963 sp's let's hear it or go forward with this research as the facts. Hopefully 66 and 67 will play out the same way to identify DP, SP and XSP.

[Cliff Bowman]

I know I have to have better graphics so I will try it again. I'm nowhere near as savvy as Darren, but this is the best I can do for the time being. This is how I believe the top half of the 6th series sheet is laid out, I will do the bottom half in the next post. I'm almost certain that I know all 11 cards that are in each of the 12 horizontal rows in each series, the problem is knowing exactly where they are placed. It will take more miscut cards being discovered over time. ETA, the sheet splits up on cellphones which I was afraid of. ETA again, I messed up and have 12 spots in the horizontal rows when they should be 11.

[Cliff Bowman]

This is how I believe the bottom half of the 6th series sheet goes. ETA, the sheet splits up on cellphones which I was afraid of. ETA again, I messed up and have 12 spots in the horizontal rows when they should be 11.

[Cliff Bowman]

These are combinations that fit together in the 6th series yellow block but I don't know where they are on the sheet.

[Cliff Bowman]

These are the only combinations I have on the 6th series red block, I don't know where they are exactly on the sheet.

[Cliff Bowman]

These are combos I have for the 6th series blue block but I don't know where they are on the sheet.

[Kevvyg1026]

The Killebrew string (red-banner, yellow insert), from left-to-right, is 493, 500, 464. Because of wrong-backs, this means there must be an upside down yellow banner, red insert string (from left-to-right) of 504 (Johnson), 474 (Fisher), and 463 (Schaffernorth).

Then, there is a miscut of the back of 504 (johnson) which indicates that either a manager (491, Craft) or team card (503, Braves) must be above that card. Because of the orientation of the thin block on the card back, I believe it is Craft that is above Johnson.

So, if the Yellow banner, blue inset string you showed earlier (Craft, Martin, Kasko) is correct, then that is the three-card string above the upside down yellow-red string of 504 (Johnson), 474 (Fisher), and 463 (Schaffernorth).

In other words, Craft is above Johnson, Martin is above Fisher (not Torres as shown) and Kasko is above Schaffernorth. However, the miscut on the back of Torres (482) clearly suggests that it is the card below Martin (499). So, a dilemma exists. Either the order of cards is not completely correct, or the Braves card is above Johnson.

Thoughts??

[Kevvyg1026]

I think I answered my own question. It is probably the Braves team card (503) that is above Johnson

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by BillP

Cliff or others, how would one submit the good work on the 63 high series to beckett to get the publications aligned with the fact that there are no sp's here? Looks like Cliff has nailed them all. So if there is other information that we don't know about driving 1963 sp's let's hear it or go forward with this research as the facts. Hopefully 66 and 67 will play out the same way to identify DP, SP and XSP.

Ain't nobody gonna listen to me, I have to beat my head against the wall to get the Trading Card Database to make minor corrections.

[Cliff Bowman]

I finally solved something that has been bugging me the last few years. I haven't gotten to it yet, but the one row that I knew the order of most of the cards was the 7th series yellow based blue inset circle row. The only thing I didn't know was the order of the ninth and tenth cards, Billy Klaus and Russ Snyder, but now I do thanks to this eBay auction. It goes Cliff Cook eighth card, Billy Klaus ninth card, and Russ Snyder tenth card. Now I need to figure out the Pagan, Osborne, and Adair cards.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

Ain't nobody gonna listen to me, I have to beat my head against the wall to get the Trading Card Database to make minor corrections.

Personally, the 'formal' guides have always seemed to me to mostly publish what certain people want to be true or insisted was true, rather than any formal study using verifiable fact of that which actually is true. Many sets have the wrong dates, many cards marked as rookies are rather ridiculous (how many years did they insist Ruth's rookie was the 33 Goudey?), and SP tags seem to be applied almost at random. It's more time consuming, but I keep my own notes for each set I'm interested in because the published information is so frequently wrong, or unverified and unsupported.

I'll check my 63 set for series 6 miscuts tomorrow.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by BillP

Cliff or others, how would one submit the good work on the 63 high series to beckett to get the publications aligned with the fact that there are no sp's here? Looks like Cliff has nailed them all. So if there is other information that we don't know about driving 1963 sp's let's hear it or go forward with this research as the facts. Hopefully 66 and 67 will play out the same way to identify DP, SP and XSP.

We have an uncut sheet of 1967 Topps. We just don’t know how many times each card was printed. The SPs and DPs are pretty clear. The 1966 sheet is a work in progress. We can identify a few errors in the lists, but there is still a lot of work to do. 1963 Topps we really don’t know enough to say anything. There are questions that have not been answered and assumptions made without evidence.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by rats60

We have an uncut sheet of 1967 Topps. We just don’t know how many times each card was printed. The SPs and DPs are pretty clear. The 1966 sheet is a work in progress. We can identify a few errors in the lists, but there is still a lot of work to do. 1963 Topps we really don’t know enough to say anything. There are questions that have not been answered and assumptions made without evidence.

Tell me what assumption I have made and I will show what evidence I have. I have miscut and print error cards showing cards from the yellow block blue inset circle row and the red block green inset circle row that were either at the top or the bottom of the sheet. I have miscut cards that contain parts of two different color block cards showing that the blue block orange inset circle row butts up against the red block green inset circle row. You are absolutely correct that the way I have the color blocks laid out on the sheet is speculative, the reason I did that is I was going by how the wrong backs work out. Every wrong back I have ever seen from the 1963 set is simply a card from a sheet that had the back printed upside down, no exceptions. While looking through them I noticed that a yellow block blue inset circle wrong back always has a red block green circle wrong back, a yellow block red inset circle always has a red block yellow inset circle wrong back, a blue block orange inset circle always has a blue block red inset circle wrong back, and vice versa. No exceptions. In order to make this work out, this was the only way I could get the sheets to follow that pattern. The Curt Flood is at the top right corner of the sheet and the Jay Hook is at the lower left corner of the sheet, if you check eBay or WorthPoint it will show a wrong back Curt Flood with a Jay Hook back or vice versa every time. Other than the placement of the 22 card color blocks on the sheet, all evidence clearly shows that each series had 66 cards, there were three different color blocks of 22 cards each, the yellow block blue inset circle row and the red block green inset circle row were on each end of the sheet, the blue block orange inset circle row butted up against the red block green inset circle row, and there are no short prints unless an entire 22 card color block was somehow short printed.

[G1911]

Further explanations are in this thread: https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=284250. The direct evidence is quite compelling that we are pretty close (well, Cliff is pretty close here!) to establishing the sheet via the miscuts.

[Cliff Bowman]

This is how I how believe the top half of the 7th series sheet is laid out, I will do the bottom half in my next post.

[Cliff Bowman]

This is how I believe the bottom half of the 7th series sheet is laid out.

[Cliff Bowman]

I could be wrong on the layout of the six 22 card color blocks on a 132 card sheet but this works out with all of the evidence I have so far. This Gary Peters rookie card has been a thorn in my side, though. I have it in the red based yellow inset circle row, but for the life of me I can't figure out what card that circle belongs to and it looks like it could be yellow rather than green. That would mean I have it in the wrong row. As of now I have Danny Murtaugh and the Tigers team card in the red based green inset circle row and the four player rookie cards of Gary Peters and Marcelino Lopez in the red based yellow inset circle row. ETA, it can't be a yellow inset circle card above this card because every 7th series red based yellow inset card has the name and position lower than the color circle and that would be visible. It's either a red based green inset circle card or some type of print defect.

[Cliff Bowman]

On the 7th series yellow based red inset circle row I have these four cards in consecutive order but I don't know where they are on the sheet.