1952 Topps House gray/yellow

[flkersn]

Originally Posted by flkersn

Thanks for the information. I believe you, but...I am having trouble with the math. At the risk of inviting ridicule, I offer the following:

40 cards TP is 120, 20 cards DP is 40, for a total of 160 cards on a 200-card sheet. What am I doing wrong? Maybe my brain is too small.

Bill

Does anybody have an opinion?

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by flkersn

Does anybody have an opinion?

If the series were indeed only 60 cards, that would be correct. If not, I assume the remaining cards were single printed. It would work out if Patrick were referring to 2 half sheets of 100 cards each......and each half sheet had card numbers 171 to 190 single printed with the remaining cards double printed. This equals both the number of cards presumed to be printed in the series....60.....and the total number of cards printed per half sheet of 100 cards.

In Sy Berger's original article on creating the 1952 Topps set, he mentioned he cut and pasted the master cards at his home over his living room table. However, I have not noticed (nor have I paid close attention) to variations in these 40 cards. You would expect to find 40 cards in the 3rd series with variations.

Z

[flkersn]

Thanks for the clarification. Indeed, 40 DP and 20 SP (or that 2:1 ratio) does work; 3:2 did not.

I appreciate your responding.

Bill

[SMPEP]

This is what I get when I post without checking my notes! It should be DPs versus SPs. Here is the layout:

3rd series:
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170
171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180

181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170

Sorry for the confusion.
Patrick

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

This is what I get when I post without checking my notes! It should be DPs versus SPs. Here is the layout:

3rd series:
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170
171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180

181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170

Sorry for the confusion.
Patrick

Patrick,

Did you get this info from viewing an uncut sheet?

Z

[flkersn]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

This is what I get when I post without checking my notes! It should be DPs versus SPs. Here is the layout:

3rd series:
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170
171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180

181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190
131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170

Sorry for the confusion.
Patrick

Just for the heck of it I looked at the PSA pop reports. I summed all the cards with the normal cream back from #131-170 graded by PSA--16,976. Then I looked at all the cards with cream back from #171-190 graded by PSA--7,388. This is a 2.3:1 ratio.

The overall ratio of creams to grays graded by PSA is 31:1. The real ratio is probably a lot higher since only better-looking creams would be sent for grading while most grays will be sent. The ratio of cream to gray in the 131-170 subset is 29.47 and in the 171-190 subset it is 35.35.

Not sure what it all means, but:

First, the totals are generally consistent with the 2:1 ratio suggested for the sheet.

Second it seems to suggest that the 171-190 cards are rarer relative to the 131-170 in gray backs than in cream.

Perhaps this suggests what many of you have said for years--that the gray backs simply did not wear as well over the years (note the paucity of high grade grays) and disappeared. Might it also say something about the distribution method?

Anyway, food for thought and comment. Perhaps no one is interested in this but me, but it's raining here and I was looking for something interesting to do and this was as close as I could come.

Bill

[SMPEP]

I used to look at population reports too. But I think that's a misguided way to look at it. What you get in graded cards is high grade cards. That's a bit random. And cards laid out poorly on the sheet (Gus Bell talking to you!) are always underrepresented. Plus, there's an incentive to get a card graded for every number (so you can have a full set). So I actually think the better methodology is to count total cards for sale on Ebay. This reflect who set builders need and don't need.

Cheers,
Patrick

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by SMPEP

I used to look at population reports too. But I think that's a misguided way to look at it. What you get in graded cards is high grade cards. That's a bit random. And cards laid out poorly on the sheet (Gus Bell talking to you!) are always underrepresented. Plus, there's an incentive to get a card graded for every number (so you can have a full set). So I actually think the better methodology is to count total cards for sale on Ebay. This reflect who set builders need and don't need.

Cheers,
Patrick

I was tracking T201 Mecca Double Folders in the same way to try to determine which ones where quadruple printed versus the single printed cards based upon population reports. After a lot of data collecting I realized I had skewed results as star cards or condition sensitive cards were submitted for grading more frequently than other cards.

Z