1968 Topps Yastrzemski Checklist variation question

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

Here is a thread from three years ago where someone was caught red handed photoshopping a 'newly found' variation on Trading Card Database https://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=238632. I have run across at least four photoshopped variation cards that don't exist on the Trading Card Database, 1975 Hostess 'Bert Hooton', 1979 Kellogg's Pete Rose 2nd printing with 33 triples and the 'P' logo, 1979 Kellogg's Carl Yastrzemski 2nd printing with 9930 AB, 1979 Kellogg's Ron Guidry 2nd printing with 397 hits. I have no doubt if I went searching for them I could find more. Why in the world would someone take the time to photoshop a 1975 Hostess or a 1979 Kellogg's card and then send the scan to a web site? ETA: The member at Trading Card Database who submitted the disputed 1968 Topps 3rd series checklist variation scan is also the same member who submitted the fake 1979 Kellogg's Pete Rose and Carl Yastrzemski variation scans, iffie99.

I understand the frustration with fake scans on TCD -- but I just checked the 1968 Yaz Checklists and am totally comfortable with setting up the two listings for each variety with the B on the cap on the B totally visible and the B on the cap touching the circle. That one is legit. Maybe not the TCB scan but I'll vouch for the COMC scans since those are done with actual cards in hand

I found both versions of the 1979 Kellogg Rose with triples in the COMC Data Base so that one is legit as well

We also have both versions of the Hostess Bert Hooton (Hooten) in the COMC Data Base so that one is legit as well

I did not see on a quick scan the Yaz with 9930 At-Bats but if someone wants to do a deeper dive than me and verify go ahead.

On a historical note -- for years someone (we believe it was Larry Fritsch) claimed there was a no traded version of the 1959 Bill White RC (#359). I look every time I see one and have never seen one in 40 years -- so I keep hoping but no presumption that one exists either. On the other hand - the Joe Doyle T206 version was rumoured to exist for years as well and did pop up so never say never

Rich

[Cliff Bowman]

You are misunderstanding what I am saying. Yes, the variations exist and I own all of them. What I am saying is that members at Trading Card Database have created two variations that don’t exist and put up photoshopped scans of four cards that do not exist. The 1979 Kellogg’s Pete Rose 33 triples ONLY appears on the first printing with the two Quaker Kids team emblem and the copyright inside Tony the Tiger’s scarf. It does not exist on the second printing with the ‘P’ logo and the copyright under Tony the Tiger. The 1979 Kellogg’s Carl Yastrzemski error 9930 AB ONLY appears on the first printing with the copyright inside Tony the Tiger’s scarf, it does not exist on the second printing with the copyright under Tony the Tiger. The 1975 Hostess Burt Hooton corrected card DOES NOT EXIST with Bert Hooton on the front of the card, it has Burt Hooton. The error card has Bert Hooten on the front of the card. It’s difficult to tell on the scan of the 1979 Kellogg’s Ron Guidry but I now believe that it is actually the correct second printing with 396 rather 397 and is the wrong card. I am not familiar with the 1968 checklist but I believe what the OP said about it and it doesn’t exist.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

I just checked the 1968 Yaz Checklists and am totally comfortable with setting up the two listings for each variety with the B on the cap on the B totally visible and the B on the cap touching the circle. That one is legit.

Did you check all the Sold outs to see if there were any previously sold that have the back variety shown in the image? The Hooton seems fairly obvious based on fuzziness and letter spacing that it's fake. The '68 back looks more real to me. But it would be hard for nobody else to have checklisted it over time, since it was already a known wording variation.

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Did you check all the Sold outs to see if there were any previously sold that have the back variety shown in the image? The Hooton seems fairly obvious based on fuzziness and letter spacing that it's fake. The '68 back looks more real to me. But it would be hard for nobody else to have checklisted it over time, since it was already a known wording variation.

John:

Whenever I check for variants I just check every card that has been ever been scanned. I don't know if they are sold out or not when I do a project such as that or the Hostess Brown Backs, etc. I just check every card we have ever had.

On the Yaz -- I set up one of each new variant you can check and if you want to add that's fine I'm having a ton of fun with the Artist's Names -- keep those coming.

Rich

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

I'm having a ton of fun with the Artist's Names -- keep those coming.

Cool; doing the best I can with those. Deciphering some signatures is like reading hieroglyphics.... ;-)