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

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by stlcardsfan

Nice one on Perry call. Do we know who is below Tigers team? That would be next to 595 Jackson.

Bob Sadowski is below the Tiger’s team card, Orlando McFarlane is to the right of the Tigers team card.

[Cliff Bowman]

Can #525 Gary Bell be placed next to #546 Siebler under Choo Choo Coleman or is it believed that there may be two separate rows with Coleman? ETA, I get it now, Bell is in the fifth spot on either the Hoerner row or the Taylor row, much more likely the Hoerner row but can't be confirmed yet.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

Can #525 Gary Bell be placed next to #546 Siebler under Choo Choo Coleman or is it believed that there may be two separate rows with Coleman?

There must be more than one placement of the row with Coleman on the sheet.

[Kevvyg1026]

I speculate that it is likely that Choo Choo (in row B, headed by Perranowski) will always be above 525 (in row C, headed by Hoerner) for all three rows in which the card appears. So, I believe it is safe to place 525 below Choo Choo. We also have a miscut with 542 (Smith) above 550 (McCovey), so it is safe to place 542 in the 5th column in row D (below Bell, 525) since McCovey is in the 5th column in row E.

[Kevvyg1026]

Almost positive that Bell (525) is under Choo Choo and next to Siebler while 542 (Smith) is under Bell and next to 571 (Roberts). That would put Bell in the row with Hoerner Rookie Card (what I call row C). I also suspect that Bell is always under Choo Choo in this sheet configuration.

Based on PoP reports, and the various miscut info I've seen, I suspect that the row pattern on one half-sheet was A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E while on the other is was D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G.

There is evidence that suggests row B was under both row A (northrup) and row G, which is why I prefer this configuration to others.

A = Northrup row
B = Perranowski row
C = Hoerner row
D = Taylor row
E = Salmon row
F = Mantilla row
G = Shirley (591) row.

I am almost positive that the strip 582, 597, 592, 549 is in row D and finishes that row (i.e. Columns 8, 9, 10, & 11) but need to see something to the right of 582 to confirm.

The 3 card sequence 598, 583, 569 is pretty much guaranteed to be in either row B (perranowski) or row C (hoerner) as is the sequence 532, 552.

[BillP]

My guess would be 598 583 and 569 would be in C since the cards below have generally been considered as non SP types. To be proven out though.

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

Almost positive that Bell (525) is under Choo Choo and next to Siebler while 542 (Smith) is under Bell and next to 571 (Roberts). That would put Bell in the row with Hoerner Rookie Card (what I call row C). I also suspect that Bell is always under Choo Choo in this sheet configuration.

Based on PoP reports, and the various miscut info I've seen, I suspect that the row pattern on one half-sheet was A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E while on the other is was D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G.

There is evidence that suggests row B was under both row A (northrup) and row G, which is why I prefer this configuration to others.

A = Northrup row
B = Perranowski row
C = Hoerner row
D = Taylor row
E = Salmon row
F = Mantilla row
G = Shirley (591) row.

I am almost positive that the strip 582, 597, 592, 549 is in row D and finishes that row (i.e. Columns 8, 9, 10, & 11) but need to see something to the right of 582 to confirm.

The 3 card sequence 598, 583, 569 is pretty much guaranteed to be in either row B (perranowski) or row C (hoerner) as is the sequence 532, 552.

I think a card by card breakdown, as we did with 67 would be very interesting here. (If already done, I apologize)

Rich

[Kevvyg1026]

I believe that the Perranowski row is always above the Hoerner row on both half-slits, so the Bell card can be placed in row C under Choo Choo and next to Siebler. That puts George Smith (542) next to Roberts in row D. The Smith card should be under Bell in three rows but will be at the top of the 2nd half-slit. In other words, Smith is in row D and the pattern across the two half-slits or sheets is:

Slit A: A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E

Slit B: D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G

[toppcat]

Well I did an eBay canvass of the highs this AM and got some interesting results, not the least of which is that the overall eBay item count never matches the actual number of items, which was a PITA (I had the same issue with the 1967 high # count).

First, this is the count in numerical card order. The average is 35.8 of each card. I have no idea why #571 (Roberts) would be skewed so much but I checked it three times.

NO COUNT
517 34
523 28
524 16
525 17
526 11
527 9
528 12
529 54
530 61
531 64
532 19
533 73
534 30
535 39
536 72
537 72
538 48
539 18
540 17
541 30
542 65
543 22
544 27
545 13
546 21
547 25
548 49
549 54
550 38
551 33
552 22
553 27
554 39
555 14
556 18
557 16
558 40
559 15
560 43
561 24
562 25
563 8
564 45
565 19
566 17
567 27
568 58
569 19
570 32
571 117
572 65
573 63
574 32
575 31
576 24
577 45
578 26
579 37
580 42
581 77
582 60
583 15
584 32
585 43
586 16
587 71
588 21
589 19
590 29
591 27
592 63
593 52
594 40
595 53
596 18
597 27
598 35

And here is the count in ascending order of the eBay count:

NO COUNT
563 8
527 9
526 11
528 12
545 13
555 14
559 15
583 15
524 16
557 16
586 16
525 17
540 17
566 17
539 18
556 18
596 18
532 19
565 19
569 19
589 19
546 21
588 21
543 22
552 22
561 24
576 24
547 25
562 25
578 26
544 27
553 27
567 27
591 27
597 27
523 28
590 29
534 30
541 30
575 31
570 32
574 32
584 32
551 33
517 34
598 35
579 37
550 38
535 39
554 39
558 40
594 40
580 42
560 43
585 43
564 45
577 45
538 48
548 49
593 52
595 53
529 54
549 54
568 58
582 60
530 61
573 63
592 63
531 64
542 65
572 65
587 71
536 72
537 72
533 73
581 77
571 117

[Kevvyg1026]

Ok. I added these counts to the ones I've been keeping since May and averaged them. Thus, I have counts performed in early May, late June, early July, mid July, and end July. Please note that the 517 count should only include the W. Sox variation not both.

The results are as follows (note that I put 598, 583, & 569 in row C since I am relatively certain about their positions. I also put 595, 523, 582, 597, 592, & 549 in row D for the same reason):

The results for the various rows for average, stdev, median, high, and low) are as follows:

Row A (all cards known):
Row B (5 cards known)
Row C (8 cards known)
Row D (all known)
Row E (8 cards known)
Row F (all known)
Row G (8 known)

A: 59.6 19.0 66.8 90.0 35.0
B: 28.4 12.9 24.6 52.5 18.3
C: 29.8 5.7 29.9 38.8 20.0
D: 67.1 19.9 67.0 117.3 38.0
E. 54.7 17.9 48.6 86.0 38.8
F: 27.6 15.8 20.8 62.3 12.8
G: 32.2 11.7 34.9 44.8 12.5

The large std dev for row D (Taylor) is driven mostly by the Roberts card (571), which typically has much higher counts than any other card in that row.

The large Std dev for row F (Mantilla) is primarily due to the high counts for both 593 (Camilli) and 548 (Kolb).

And Row B has the Chance card (564), which also typically has almost twice as many cards available as other cards in that row.

[BillP]

Great stuff and I for one am glad you have kept this monthly data. I think this bears out the 3 x 4 and 4 x 3 theory well. 2 variations I'd like to bring up:

559 Pena, blue dot bottom right
582 roggenburk, blue blob in the sky

Both probably on one of the slits v a clean version on the other.
Also looking at 554 Northrup, border frame off center

thx for this data.
bill

[Kevvyg1026]

The Perry card also seems to appear both with and without clouds or white blobs in the sky

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

Ok. I added these counts to the ones I've been keeping since May and averaged them. Thus, I have counts performed in early May, late June, early July, mid July, and end July. Please note that the 517 count should only include the W. Sox variation not both.

You probably figured out my count was for all examples of the checklist. The odd and extreme overprinting of only a handful of cards is bizarre but real. Wonder why?

[Kevvyg1026]

So, yes it is interesting that the POP surveys show these results. However, such counts are not necessarily reflective of what took place 50+ years ago. As we have "discovered" for other years (e.g., 1963), some of the lore surrounding short prints that has been accepted for many years is not always entirely accurate.

In the Northrup row, card 581 (martinez) consistently has higher counts than others in the same row. That card is in column 4.

In the Perranowski row, the same thing is true for Chance (564), which is located in column 4.

Most of the cards in the Hoerner row appear to have comparable POPs.

Roberts (#571) has the highest counts on the Taylor row and it is also in column 4.

For the Salmon row, card 533 (Adair) typically has the higher counts, but Franks (537) is not that far behind. Those cards are in columns 6 & 8 respectively. Williams is in column 4, so perhaps his ebay POP count may be influenced by his star & Cub recognition, meaning perhaps people don't want to part with the card.

The Mantilla row has two cards (593, 548) which appear much more often than others in that row. Those two cards are located in 6 and 9. Card 563 (Tovar), located in column 7, normally has the lowest population available for sale. The Column 4 card is the Twins team card, and that usually has a low POP count.

Most of the cards in the Shirley/Jackson row have comparable POPs, although both McLain (540, in C2) and Navarro (527, C4) are typically on the low side.

And for what it matters, I suspect that the Northrup and Salmon rows occupy the top and bottom rows on one slit while the Taylor and Shirley rows most likely occupy the top/bottom rows on the other slit.

Having said all of the above, I still believe that if examined for a long enough period, this type of data would yield a reasonably accurate representation. So, for example, if one examined Worthpoint and removed duplicate sales from the PoP, a more accurate picture might emerge. I wish I had the time and energy to undertake such a project, but alas, I don't. I will have to be content with simply trying to reconstruct the sheet configuration!

[Cliff Bowman]

I think the Sullivan is new, the McCovey-Williams is already known but I found another example.

[Cliff Bowman]

Unless I am mistaken, it can only be Siebler, Roggenburk, or Queen to the left of Sullivan.

[Cliff Bowman]

I think it has to be Roggenburk.

[BillP]

Thread # 158 and #166 queen and howser. The miscut seems the same, maybe queen is in that G row. It's always been a sleeper tough card along with 586 raymind.