1982 Topps Blackless

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Reviving an old thread here. I didn't even know these existed until 2017 or so. I have a couple dozen, but I don't have any of the big ones yet. These are some of the cards I have picked up more recently along with the standard 82s for comparison. It's weird, but I am really getting into these and also am starting to notice the '84 Topps encased. All these years I didn't realize there was so much fun and affordable stuff in my favorite decade to collect!

Some of the scans uploaded sideways, and I am too tired to fix them...

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[holybull]

Anyone have a Johnny Bench Blackless for sale?

[robw]

Anyone looking to sell HOFers or All-Stars?

[clydepepper]

Ok. I'm still not understanding what makes a card 'blackless'

Most of the ones posted have the color black included on their fronts.


Please explain.


.

[tonyo]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Ok. I'm still not understanding what makes a card 'blackless'

Most of the ones posted have the color black included on their fronts.


Please explain.


.

I'm no expert and didn't even know these existed until net54, but....... I think the photos themselves aren't effected. It's the signatures, positions, and black line border around the photo that's missing.

[clydepepper]

The only 'blackless' I'm seeing is between posts 8 & 9, where George Brett's name is present on one - in black - and not in any color on the other.


It would be easier to understand if both versions of any given card were posted.

Thanks in advance for making things clearer for these old eyes.



.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

The only 'blackless' I'm seeing is between posts 8 & 9, where George Brett's name is present on one - in black - and not in any color on the other.


It would be easier to understand if both versions of any given card were posted.

Thanks in advance for making things clearer for these old eyes.



.

On most 1982 Topps blackless cards the only things missing are the facsimile signature and the the border line around the photo. On three teams, Pirates, Phillies, and Orioles, the position is also missing. On the All Star cards the player’s name and the border line around the photo are missing. On the In Action cards the only thing missing is the border line around the photo. Some of the posters on this thread have shown both versions of the card, regular and blackless, I think that is what is confusing you.

[Exhibitman]

Blackless cards are a long-time staple of error collecting; the 1982s simply have more examples.

[ALR-bishop]

What got Blacless notoriety is Lemke listed them a separate set in the SCD Standard Catalog back when it listed post 80 issues. As a result PSA began stabbing them.

They are not really variations, just print defects but the problem occurred on 3 entire sheets , A, B and C, so there are at least 396 in a "set". There are some variants among the 396 as well, even among full blackless versions.

Some blackless cards from the D sheet have shown up on eBay, but it is not clear if all cards from that sheet can be found blackless or that the defects occurred on multiple sheets or as many times as was the case with the A,B and C cards.

B and C sheet blackless cards seem scarcer than A cards. D sheet examples are apparently even more scarce. The A, B and C blackless cards all showed up in packs. I think A and Bs in Michigan and C in NY. Not sure if Ds could be found in packs or where

Agree with Adam such blackless defects show up in other years, but apparently not to the same recurring extent over such a large number of cards as in 1982. I also have some examples from 68 and 71 like those he posted.

[jimtb]

When you see these Trammell cards in person, it's clear to see that the black was just "running low" - it looks like your printer at home running low on ink. However, because I've been looking for a Trammell blackless for so long, that this is just the coolest thing to me.

[bnorth]

The 82's have a lot of errors. The blackless, blueless, and a ton of wrong backs. Has anyone seen a blackless wrong back?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

What got Blacless notoriety is Lemke listed them a separate set in the SCD Standard Catalog back when it listed post 80 issues. As a result PSA began stabbing them.

They are not really variations, just print defects but the problem occurred on 3 entire sheets , A, B and C, so there are at least 396 in a "set". There are some variants among the 396 as well, even among full blackless versions.

Some blackless cards from the D sheet have shown up on eBay, but it is not clear if all cards from that sheet can be found blackless or that the defects occurred on multiple sheets or as many times as was the case with the A,B and C cards.

B and C sheet blackless cards seem scarcer than A cards. D sheet examples are apparently even more scarce. The A, B and C blackless cards all showed up in packs. I think A and Bs in Michigan and C in NY. Not sure if Ds could be found in packs or where

Agree with Adam such blackless defects show up in other years, but apparently not to the same recurring extent over such a large number of cards as in 1982. I also have some examples from 68 and 71 like those he posted.

All that is to me one of the biggest Topps mysteries. For most, it's enough to shrug and say "Well, Topps... " just because they did loads of odd things.

But as near as I can tell, the 364 card double sheets were printed as A and B / C and D/E and F so those pairs should be equally common.

Maybe they caught the D sheets but none of the others?
Maybe if it was the ink running out it was localized to one side of the press so very few D sheet cards didn't get missed?