1961 Topps SP Research

[JollyElm]

I have always had questions and theories regarding the 1961 Topps cards that have traditionally been accepted as 'short prints' and labeled as such.
So I located an uncut 132 card 1961 Topps sheet through a Google search that contains each of the well-known nine SP cards (others may list it as 10 or more SP's, but the 9 seem to be universally accepted). It's a low resolution image, but it's pretty easy to see some detail. (The weirdness at the very top is a couple of enlarged cards superimposed over the image of the sheet, so pay them no mind.)

The 'official' SP's are:
371 Bill Skowron
402 Larsen Pitches Perfect Game
408 Mathewson K's 267
417 Juan Marichal
421 Ty Cline
423 Charlie Neal
428 Ray Barker
430 Bill Mazeroski
436 Jim Maloney

But here is said sheet and something curious comes to mind:

Image.jpg

The 22 cards outlined in green appear only once on the sheet and they include the 9 cards listed above. Cards appearing outside of that group are printed twice on the sheet.

So why don't SP lists include all 22 of these single-printed cards? All the cards that are generally agreed to be SP's are right there intermingled with the rest of them, but you never see any of these guys referred to as SP's. And the group includes Hank Aaron and Lou Gehrig!

Here's the full list. Checklists are always a crapshoot, because they sometimes printed them on previous sheets, so it's possible that card isn't an SP. But, of course, I could be wrong.
361 Checklist 5
371 Bill Skowron
372 Bob Hendley
389 Ralph Terry
399 Cliff Cook
400 Vern Law
402 Don Larsen Perfect
405 Lou Gehrig Streak
407 Jack Chesbro Wins 41
408 Christy Mathewson Ks
412 Larry Sherry
413 Eddie Yost
415 Hank Aaron
417 Juan Marichal
421 Ty Cline SP
423 Charlie Neal
463 Milwaukee Braves TC (misnumbered #426)
428 Ray Barker
430 Bill Mazeroski
436 Jim Maloney
441 Dick Bertell
446 Bob Taylor

Are there other sheets that reconfigure the layout of these cards to print more of the cards I'm talking about? If not, and this uncut sheet is the only way they printed that group of cards, then all 22 of them should be recognized as SP's.

And yes, there are obviously other SP's elsewhere in this set (Berra MVP, etc.), but my focus is only on this sheet of cards.

Perhaps someone here has some knowledge in this area that could help shed light on the mystery??

[savedfrommyspokes]

I have always found the 389, 405, 415, 426/463, and 446 cards to be almost as tough as the established SPs to find centered in nice shape. Some of the cards in the row beneath the SP row have also been tougher to find nice examples of over the years(even though on this sheet they have been repeated twice).... they include the 375, 383, 396, 401, 409, and 425 cards. Some of the cards in the rows above and below the SP row (noted above)seem to command a higher pct of "book" value than the other cards on the row because they seem to be in a lesser supply(quality wise). For example, the 389 and 446 cards have had recent sales on ebay in the $12-15 range for mainly centered, NM copies.

What would be interesting to see is another sheet from this series/printing to see if it is laid out the same and matches the sheet you have found.

[hangman62]

Jolly,
thats quite interesting..and well done

might you have similar info/ uncut sheets on the 66T set ?

[toppcat]

Any SP's in a Topps set from 1960 thru at least the 1990's should be divisible by 11 in overall number. In fact, other than 1958 when they mucked around with the Mantle and Musial AS cards, that divisor should stretch back to 1957.

[goheels]

Thanks Darren for the picture of the half sheet of the 5th series. Beautiful work as always.

I'd love to see the other half sheet--anyone out there--and a close up in particular of the checklist cards.

This series numbers 371 to 446 which is 76 cards. Add in the previous check list for this series--Checklist 5th series card is 361--and you get 77 distinct cards. The 6th check list is card 437.

This half sheet therefore holds all the 77 unique cards in 7 rows plus 5 extra rows at the bottom.

I would think the other half sheet would have all 77 cards as well, plus 5 extra rows.

If those 5 rows on the second sheet included the 2 that were only seen once in the other half, then we should have 3 extra rows of cards for the two half sheets, and 4 rows that are only printed three times.

Sheet A: 77 cards once, 55 cards printed twice
Sheet B: (assumption): 77 cards done once, 5 rows duplicated that would include the 2 only printed once on A and then 3 extra rows.

Final count: 4 rows x 11 cards x 3 times each=132 cards
3 rows x 11 cards x 4 times each=132 cards
That makes up 264 for the full sheet.

If that is correct, then would be looking at 33 cards that are 33% more common, with a 4:3 ratio? A different way of looking at it.

Without seeing the other half sheet I don't think we have enough data here. If the other half sheet shorted the same 2 rows, then we would be looking at 22 short cards. That would be 5 rows x 11 cards x 4 times= 220 cards and 2 rows x 11 cards x 2 times=44 cards for the 264 total.

Thoughts?

Carlton

[toppcat]

It's not always that linear from one half sheet to the other from what I have seen. The 67 Highs are a 77 card series where there are some odd things going on. 44 66 88 and 110 card series should not really have any SP's but 55, 77 and (maybe) 99 could.

[goheels]

Your prior work on the 67 high series was pure mathematical genius.

What is your best guess to the relative numbers of these cards?

[MisterBungle]

Here is my partial sheet of '61s. None of those cards are on it though, so I don't think it's going to be much help.

I can say that when I was putting my set together, back before the internet and eBay, the Dick Bertell #441 was the hardest common for me to find. In fact it was the last common low number I acquired for my set. Whether that means it's a short print, or that I was just unlucky finding that card, I don't know.





~

[ALR-bishop]

Great stuff as usual Carlton, even if most of it is over my head. Good thread

[JollyElm]

I thought I'd pull a Lazarus and raise this thread from the dead. Recently, I ran across this picture of a guy holding uncut 1961 sheets from the lower series (2 & 3 perhaps?) and wanted to post it here. Willie Mays (#150), Ed Mathews (#120), Whitey Ford (#160) and Bobby Richardson (#180) are included on them.

1961ToppsUncutSheets.jpg

The cards I slashed out with red lines appear twice on this sheet, whilst (I always wanted to use that word) the 4 rows of 11 cards outlined in bright green appear only once.

Now, would the other 'half' of this sheet contain these same cards (in different amounts) to make the totals of each card the same in the end? Logically, that would require the 'green' rows to appear at both the top and the bottom of the unseen sheet with the 'red' cards only appearing in a single instance in the middle?

Anyone know if this is the case?

[Rich Klein]

the 1961 5th Series SP's was verified from a sheet I saw at a Nassau Coliseum show in 1993.

We already knew from experience that cards such as Jim Maloney RC and Bill Skowron were short and seeing them all in the same row AND those being the ONLY cards not double printed on the sheet cofirmed what we already knew from when Al Rosen bought a major find of those 1961 cards. The Skowron card was found in half the quantity of the other cards in that find and the other SP's were also short.

I'm very comfortable with what are listed as SP's in that series but if there is another full sheet, there may be another difficult row

Rich

[jmoran19]

Yes any series that is 87/88 cards (Current series CL is usually a DP) and shows this type of layout would have rows 5 thru 8 on the sheet your showing as rows 1 thru 4 and rows 9 thru 12 on the other half and then the rows you crossed out as 5 thru 8.

88 cards printed 3 times = 264 cards

John

Originally Posted by JollyElm

I thought I'd pull a Lazarus and raise this thread from the dead. Recently, I ran across this picture of a guy holding uncut 1961 sheets from the lower series (2 & 3 perhaps?) and wanted to post it here. Willie Mays (#150), Ed Mathews (#120), Whitey Ford (#160) and Bobby Richardson (#180) are included on them.

Attachment 165886

The cards I slashed out with red lines appear twice on this sheet, whilst (I always wanted to use that word) the 4 rows of 11 cards outlined in bright green appear only once.

Now, would the other 'half' of this sheet contain these same cards (in different amounts) to make the totals of each card the same in the end? Logically, that would require the 'green' rows to appear at both the top and the bottom of the unseen sheet with the 'red' cards only appearing in a single instance in the middle?

Anyone know if this is the case?

[jmoran19]

Visual proof of the 88 card x 3 layout mentionEd in post above, full 264 card sheet from 1966, also have seen a 1964 sheet just like this, will find pic and post.

John

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by jmoran19

Visual proof of the 88 card x 3 layout mentionEd in post above, full 264 card sheet from 1966, also have seen a 1964 sheet just like this, will find pic and post.

John

Excellent, John!! Thanks!!

[parkerj33]

There is no way to know the ratios until you see the other half-sheet. The sheet shown in first post you can label the rows and they are shown from top to bottom as row 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,7. Note rows 5/6 are only printed once.

What we don't know is the layout of the second half sheet. If Dave Hornish has taught me anything over the years its that it won't be obvious and clean!

I would bet that on the second half sheet, which is the one rich klein has seen, row 6 will be printed only once. I say that Rich has seen the OTHER half sheet because if he had only seen THIS half sheet they would have determined that rows 5 AND 6 (minus checklist) would be the sp's.

So if we say original post is sheet "A", and Rich saw sheet "B", i would suggest that sheet "B" has some sort of ordering like this: rows 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5.

Rich probably looked at sheet "B" and initially thought 6 AND 7 were sp's, but checking against Rosen's find, he would have correctly noticed that row 7 was in just as much abundance as every other row, thus correctly discounting row 7 as sps.

Now given Rich liked row 6 as sp's, there are 11 cards there, why wouldn't they list all 11 as sp's? well one is the checklist and that is printed in another series's sheets so that would be known to be printed extra. But what about the 10th card in that row that is not on the official list? The card on that row missing from the list is #446 Bob "Hawk" Taylor. For sure, I think we can deem him of equal rarity as any other in row 6.

Following through on this then the ratios would be:
rows 1-4: 4x
row 5: 3x
row 6: 2x
row 7: 3x

I could be wrong on others, but i am convinced row 6 is the shortest printed row based on above sheet and the sheet Rich saw....which yields the 10 true shortest print cards.

(By the way i am assigning Rich as the decider, but of course there were others involved).

[toppcat]

Yup to much of the above. From 1957-68 it's usually the high number sheets that were mucked around with the most but sometimes things happened in lower series. Topps would print past the lower series by having say 109 cards (plus next checklist) on the first print run but only having the first series run from 1-88 on the checklist. They could then print 88 card runs after that and still stay ahead by 22 cards but sometimes they would drop 11 cards in a mid series. It would all get trued up in the last series/print run. Those sneaky bastards would have you receive cards from the next series and entice you to fill that series in as well.

You have to be careful with finds, especially vending as they sometimes seem to just come from one of the half-sheets and can skew the SP's.

[Rich Klein]

Jim

That is a very accurate description of what occured. I just took all the knowledge we had about cards being short and the uncut sheet clinched it.

So yes, I was the final decider on that issue but only because of empirical evidence created over the previous decade

Rich

[parkerj33]

Hi Rich. Its Jim Parker from NY, not Craig Parker from OK (no relation).....but thanks for the confirmation!

[parkerj33]

Dave, you just snuck in another curveball quite slyly. So technically the first series in some years was really 110 (or 109) cards, not 88 as might be listed? or do the lists of series take this into account? I suppose we can never really know the ratio of cards produced in series 1 vs. series 2 or series N. That would only be known by the factory. All we can decipher from the A/B full sheet of a particular series is what the ratio of printing of one subject to another would be.

[moeson]

I recall that during the 60s, a series would be 88 cards like on the checklist but the packs would include 21 cards from the next series as a preview or teaser.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by parkerj33

Dave, you just snuck in another curveball quite slyly. So technically the first series in some years was really 110 (or 109) cards, not 88 as might be listed? or do the lists of series take this into account? I suppose we can never really know the ratio of cards produced in series 1 vs. series 2 or series N. That would only be known by the factory. All we can decipher from the A/B full sheet of a particular series is what the ratio of printing of one subject to another would be.

The print run would be 110 but the series would be 88 in a common scenario.

[Kevvyg1026]

Has anyone seen an uncut sheet (either partial or full) for either series 1 or series 6 for the 1961 Topps BB set?

The series 1 sheet should have 6 rows printed twice and four rows printed 3x. I am trying to determine which cards in that series were printed more frequently than the others.

For series 6, covering cards 447 - 522, there should be some SPs since only 77 cards were issued. Topps either printed 4 rows 3x each and 3 rows 4x each or they used a pattern of 4 rows 4x each, 2 rows 3x each, and 1 row 2x. Since there are no SPs listed in current price guides, I assume that the former was done, but would like to see some uncut material to validate.

kevin

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

Has anyone seen an uncut sheet (either partial or full) for either series 1 or series 6 for the 1961 Topps BB set?

The series 1 sheet should have 6 rows printed twice and four rows printed 3x. I am trying to determine which cards in that series were printed more frequently than the others.

For series 6, covering cards 447 - 522, there should be some SPs since only 77 cards were issued. Topps either printed 4 rows 3x each and 3 rows 4x each or they used a pattern of 4 rows 4x each, 2 rows 3x each, and 1 row 2x. Since there are no SPs listed in current price guides, I assume that the former was done, but would like to see some uncut material to validate.

kevin

I only have a 3rd series half sheet 88/44 array, so no help. I will say 77 card series were prone to the most screwing around by Topps.

[toppcat]

Double post, sorry

[jmoran19]

Kevin, I believe I'm the unoffical gatekeeper of pictures for Topps uncut sheets before 1977 LOL.

Your print assumptions are correct for both series, excluding the checklist 77 card series usually had 44 cards printed 3 times (these are the SP’s) and 33 cards printed four times on the 264 card sheet.

This is all i have for 1961 series 1. Based on other years in the 60's the bottom two rows on each half of the 264 card sheet are usually the "3 prints" That would be the Lee Maye and Killebrew rows here. Don't have anything for series 6 but how about series 7 for good measure too.

John

[rats60]

Shouldn’t Bob Taylor be listed as a short print? He is in the same row as the other 9 SPs.

[Kevvyg1026]

The one full slit shown in this thread has a pattern of: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, A, B, C, D, G where A is the row headed by Coot Veal, B headed by F Thomas, C by Turk Lown, D by Bauer, E by Aaron, etc.

The other partial panel shown in a post in this thread has Del Crandall (390) in the bottom row of a slit. Crandall is in the row headed by Bauer, so rows B, C, & D are at the bottom of slit 2.

There are also a few other miscuts that suggest that there are four rows (A, B, C, & D) printed 4x each across the two slits, with two rows (E, G) printed 3x each, and one row (F) printed 2x each. This gives 7 distinct rows and 24 rows of 11 cards each (total = 264 cards).

So, the SPs would be the cards in row F, headed by Barker. These are: 428, 423, 408, 421, 430, 417, 361, 371, 446, 402, and 436.

Of course, 361 is the checklist which was printed in series 4 as well, so it might not be classified as a SP. However, there is a variation of card #361 (yellow vs black printing, ad vs no ad), so perhaps the yellow print/ad version is a SP.

[jmoran19]

Well it's a big day in the 1960's uncut world.

With the sheet below I can confirm the 1961 5th series SP's (add Bob Taylor to the list as mentioned a few times above). The 5th series CL is also in that row but most likely printed with the 4th series too as Kevin mentioned.

In 25 years of collecting photos of uncut sheets this is the first time I personally have visual evidence of a 77 card series printed outside the 4 rows printed 3 times/3 rows printed 4 times model.

For the record the rows with Hank Aaron and Ken Boyer are the printed 3 times rows. Everything else is printed 4 times across the two half sheets.

John

[toppcat]

Looks like the same setup as the known 1967 high number slit:

A
B
C
D
E
A
F
G
B
C
D
E

[skil55voy]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Yup to much of the above. From 1957-68 it's usually the high number sheets that were mucked around with the most but sometimes things happened in lower series. Topps would print past the lower series by having say 109 cards (plus next checklist) on the first print run but only having the first series run from 1-88 on the checklist. They could then print 88 card runs after that and still stay ahead by 22 cards but sometimes they would drop 11 cards in a mid series. It would all get trued up in the last series/print run. Those sneaky bastards would have you receive cards from the next series and entice you to fill that series in as well.

You have to be careful with finds, especially vending as they sometimes seem to just come from one of the half-sheets and can skew the SP's.

Dave, this is spot on. I distinctly remember a dozen cards from the next series being released along with the next checklist to give you a preview of what was coming. I also think that the "pre-released" series cards a little tougher to get if you didn't get them mixed in with the first series release.

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

I have always had questions and theories regarding the 1961 Topps cards that have traditionally been accepted as 'short prints' and labeled as such.
So I located an uncut 132 card 1961 Topps sheet through a Google search that contains each of the well-known nine SP cards (others may list it as 10 or more SP's, but the 9 seem to be universally accepted). It's a low resolution image, but it's pretty easy to see some detail. (The weirdness at the very top is a couple of enlarged cards superimposed over the image of the sheet, so pay them no mind.)

The 'official' SP's are:
371 Bill Skowron
402 Larsen Pitches Perfect Game
408 Mathewson K's 267
417 Juan Marichal
421 Ty Cline
423 Charlie Neal
428 Ray Barker
430 Bill Mazeroski
436 Jim Maloney

But here is said sheet and something curious comes to mind:

Attachment 137502

The 22 cards outlined in green appear only once on the sheet and they include the 9 cards listed above. Cards appearing outside of that group are printed twice on the sheet.

So why don't SP lists include all 22 of these single-printed cards? All the cards that are generally agreed to be SP's are right there intermingled with the rest of them, but you never see any of these guys referred to as SP's. And the group includes Hank Aaron and Lou Gehrig!

Here's the full list. Checklists are always a crapshoot, because they sometimes printed them on previous sheets, so it's possible that card isn't an SP. But, of course, I could be wrong.
361 Checklist 5
371 Bill Skowron
372 Bob Hendley
389 Ralph Terry
399 Cliff Cook
400 Vern Law
402 Don Larsen Perfect
405 Lou Gehrig Streak
407 Jack Chesbro Wins 41
408 Christy Mathewson Ks
412 Larry Sherry
413 Eddie Yost
415 Hank Aaron
417 Juan Marichal
421 Ty Cline SP
423 Charlie Neal
463 Milwaukee Braves TC (misnumbered #426)
428 Ray Barker
430 Bill Mazeroski
436 Jim Maloney
441 Dick Bertell
446 Bob Taylor

Are there other sheets that reconfigure the layout of these cards to print more of the cards I'm talking about? If not, and this uncut sheet is the only way they printed that group of cards, then all 22 of them should be recognized as SP's.

And yes, there are obviously other SP's elsewhere in this set (Berra MVP, etc.), but my focus is only on this sheet of cards.

Perhaps someone here has some knowledge in this area that could help shed light on the mystery??

Good work Darren.

[Kevvyg1026]

That slit which J Moran posted is of the format you describe (A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E) but the other slit is B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, G.

So, rows A & G are printed 3x, rows B, C, D, E are printed 4x, and row F is only printed 2x.

[Kevvyg1026]

The SPs are in the Barker row (Barker, Neal, Mathewson, Cline, Mazeroski, Marichal, Skowron, Taylor, Larsen, & Maloney). The checklist, which appears in the same row, was also printed in series 4, so it might not be considered a SP. However, it appears as if the checklist printed in series 5 is the one with Topps in yellow and the ad for MVP cards, so that variation is definitely printed in smaller quantities than the checklist with Topps in black.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by Zach Wheat

Good work Darren.

This thread is from a long time ago, before I gained a helluva lot more knowledge from the insightful 'Slit Talkers' on the board...but thanks.