1982 Topps Blackless

[bswhiten]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

The Brett is currently at $46. What is the going rate for a normal PSA 10 1982 Topps George Brett All Star card, which is essentially what this card is?

At $257.88 now! Wow.

[swarmee]

It's been reported to Brent multiple times that this card is a mechanical error. He should save face, pull the listing, and send it back to PSA.

[bobsbbcards]

I just reported it to him as well. My faith in a seller tumbles the longer situations like this are allowed to continue, so I hope for Brent's sake that he removes the listing soon.

[bswhiten]

Just got a reply from PWCC:

Hi Ben,

Thank you for reaching out about this. We are having our team look into this and will take action on it shortly. Thank you!

Best Regards,

Melody Simnitt

PWCC Auctions, LLC
eBay id: pwcc_auctions

[ALR-bishop]

It is probably a lot rarer than an actual Blackless version and might be of more interest to a unique Brett collector.

[frankhardy]

I am a Cardinals team set collector as many of you know. I am of the opinion that these are print defects and I don't include print defects in my collection. I am sure I am in the minority on this. Can some one explain why these are not just considered a print defect?

[ALR-bishop]

I think you are in the majority but there are a bunch of weirdos, as evidenced by the never ending variations thread, that collect recurring print defects. Sometimes if that defect gets hobby recognition even a green smudge in a baseball on a card back gets value above it's common counterpart. Sometimes those print defects bring perplexing premiums due to hobby recognition, like the 58 Herrer. In fact, all Blackless cards are themselves just recurring print defects. The Blackless cards for whatever reason gained hobby recognition

And if there is a recurring or even one time oddity on a star card, player collectors sometimes have to have it.

Be glad you do not have that illness, Shane

I do agree that this card should not be sold as a Blackless card, but rather as a rare Brett error card.

[frankhardy]

So.... Reoccurring is the key word. I don't have the print defect illness, but I do have a chronic, though not debilitating, Cardinals team set illness.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by frankhardy

I am a Cardinals team set collector as many of you know. I am of the opinion that these are print defects and I don't include print defects in my collection. I am sure I am in the minority on this. Can some one explain why these are not just considered a print defect?

They are print defects but they very rare print defects.

I collect them because I'm a Mets completist. Of all the 1980's hard to find stuff (1985 Minis, 1988 Cloth, 1989 Heads Up, 1984 Encased, etc) these have been the hardest, I've been collecting them for about 2 years and only have 1/2 the Mets team set.

[ALR-bishop]

The 1982 Blackless set gained recognition after being listed as a separate set in the SCD Standard Catalog. I assume they did that because the defect is scarce, but occurs on 396 cards from the entire set, and despite the defect, was distributed in packs at retail.

Another tough Topps issue from the 80s for Yankee and Met collectors are the Met/Yankee Double header prototypes, which were sold in packs in a limited retail market. Much scarcer than the 89 or 90 regular issues, or even the other prototypes for them