1966 Topps High's - Any uncut sheets or partial sheets known?

[Kevvyg1026]

any guesses? Sorry, but it's the best image I could get556.JPG

[Kevvyg1026]

Any guesses?MC_29.jpg

[Cliff Bowman]

Boy, do I feel like an idiot now. I didn’t join this thread until halfway through, but I should have looked through it carefully from the start. I didn’t realize there were scans of all of those partial sheets in posts 20-22 and 25, it would have made a world of difference in what I have looked for and what I have posted. Oh well.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

Boy, do I feel like an idiot now. I didn’t join this thread until halfway through, but I should have looked through it carefully from the start. I didn’t realize there were scans of all of those partial sheets in posts 20-22 and 25, it would have made a world of difference in what I have looked for and what I have posted. Oh well.

Don’t! Thank you for your work here, you’ve found more than the rest of us have combined in like 3 years sign I started this thread lol.

We are getting close to piecing together a sheet I think, not just what the rows were.


Also:
On eBay there is a 591 Jackson with the back of 406 Joe Jay. 406 is a 5th series card of course, but if a sheet was ran with the series 7 fronts and the series 5 backs (using a half printed 5 sheet as scrap for testing?), and a series 5 sheet is known, it could indicate where on the sheet one of Jackson’s appearances was.

I have a 406 Jay somewhere that is wildly miscut and shows it was a border card at bottom, and I think left corner. I will dig out tomorrow and share here, but thus may be more evidence to support our hypothesis that a Jackson was a bottom row corner card

[toppcat]

Sorry, moved it, not sure what happened. See new thread!

[bb66]

Thanks again to Cliff,Kevvy,BillP,G1911,jmoran,stlcardsfan,toppcat ,and other contributors.Great job.

[G1911]

Oh so very close....

[Kevvyg1026]

All the miscuts you have posted are helpful; sometime a miscut will appear that has a different card touching (top or bottom) which helps establish the actual row patterns in different sheet locations or can help identify other pieces of info.

Knowing that Perry is above Jackson is useful even though we don't know which of two rows to put them yet as is knowing that Tigers team is next to McFarlane, and it's above Sadowski.

I strongly suspect that we will discover that the SPs listed in the price guides are not completely correct and certainly do not correspond with what the sheet patterns reveal.

Just like what was discovered with the 6th and 7th series 63s, lots of digging, logic, and analysis is required in order to determine what Topps actually did, even though what is discovered may go against what the hobby and/or hobby guides have used for the past 30 years or so.

I hope to do the same for the second half-sheet of 67s and 65s as well in the near future.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

All the miscuts you have posted are helpful; sometime a miscut will appear that has a different card touching (top or bottom) which helps establish the actual row patterns in different sheet locations or can help identify other pieces of info.

Knowing that Perry is above Jackson is useful even though we don't know which of two rows to put them yet as is knowing that Tigers team is next to McFarlane, and it's above Sadowski.

I strongly suspect that we will discover that the SPs listed in the price guides are not completely correct and certainly do not correspond with what the sheet patterns reveal.

Just like what was discovered with the 6th and 7th series 63s, lots of digging, logic, and analysis is required in order to determine what Topps actually did, even though what is discovered may go against what the hobby and/or hobby guides have used for the past 30 years or so.

I hope to do the same for the second half-sheet of 67s and 65s as well in the near future.

You guys are crowdsourcing these high number arrays! I'd like to work on the B slit 1967 hi# sheet myself, will start a thread as first three rows are already known.