68T Bill Stoneman variation

[steve B]

Originally Posted by goheels

Didn't see your post Steve. What do you think the six different cards look like?

I think it's likely the language change was done between series two and three.

So series 2 would have "the scores" while series 3 would have "your scores"(Just a guess, it could be the other way around.

The cropping difference is probably on both series.

That leaves the third version for each as the mystery prize

I believe there is probably some small difference, maybe a very small one between two positions of whichever is more common - full B or partial B.
If it's a very tiny cropping difference, it may not show since the registration of the black can change how the cropping appears.
If you look at Als cards you can see that in the three full B cards. The triangle of sky at the upper left changes size, and the amount of the B that's visible also changes. That's probably the registration rather than the cropping.

I think each card in any of the 88 card series will have three versions. (Technically this is already a fact) But most will be nearly undetectable.

For 68 the key may be the burlap like border. If it was done by putting the card images onto a full background there may be an identifiable difference in the grain.

Steve B

[JollyElm]

Here are my four variations. I have found that the best way to determine the clipped 'B' versions is to look to the lower right portion of the circle (I highlighted it on the card in the bottom row) to find the 'colorless arc,' as I call it.

It's also worth noting that in the regular version of both the 'playing card' and 'playing card game' variations, there is often a tiny, hairline occurrence of this 'colorless arc.' Here, it is seen in the bottom left 'playing card game' card. (In Al's post #10, you can see it in his 'playing card' version at top left.)

yaz1.jpgyaz2.jpg

[JollyElm]

Whoops…here's a slightly better look at the 'hairline'…
yaz5.jpg

[goheels]

...by a long time Cubs collector I messaged yesterday. He has been looking for this as long as I have.

He brings up a good point: Topps corrected in mid 1968 4 cards. Those would be the Lonborg/Lonberg AL Pitching #10 card and McCormick #400 WL card, both fixed during the series run. Correction of the Brinkman and Cox White Team Letters did not occur until MID year after the full print run; the team letters were properly made yellow in the Milton Bradley and Venezuela versions of the cards. This collector has never seen a Venezuelan Stoneman card. If the half sentence would have been corrected at the very end of the 2nd series run to give us a findable variation, then you should expect that it would have been corrected on the Venezuelan back.

I went back tonight and looked again at all of my Stoneman Milton Bradley cards. None have the corrected version. These were produced around late May or early June.

Several years ago I checked out a card shop in the North Chicago area--this guy had about 100 1968 Stonemans. I found nothing there.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Carlton, not sure if you regularly check COMC, but of the 20 68 #179s they have listed, none are the corrected version. I had 7 copies total, and none were the corrected version. Like you, I would like to see a scan of the back also. Surprised Al does not have a copy of the infamous corrected #179???

[goheels]

If Al doesn't have it or hasn't seen it then it likely doesn't exist.

I went back and looked at all 24 of my Milton Bradley 1968 AL #10 cards. None have the Lonberg variation on the back. By scarcity I believe this was corrected in the regular 68 series about 2/5 of the way through the regular print run (by early 1968). I think the value is about 2:3 which is what I am basing my guess on.

[JollyElm]

It seems highly likely a corrected '68 Stoneman never actually existed.

To me it's reminiscent of the 1964 Topps Clemente card. Although some people's need lists include a version where his 1960 stats on back have "Pittsburgh" spelled correctly (instead of "Pittsburfh"), it has never been verified.

[goheels]

I think you are correct, Darren. If nobody on this board has one, it is very unlikely it existed.

The date of the MBs being May/June 1968 AND uncorrected puts a stamp on it, I think.

Beautiful work on the Yaz CLs. Do you think that sliver on the inset is a variation?