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

Cliff Bowman · #1 07-02-2020, 12:07 PM

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 · #2 07-02-2020, 02:20 PM

Quote:

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 · #3 07-02-2020, 02:46 PM

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

bb66 · #4 07-02-2020, 02:53 PM

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

G1911 · #5 07-02-2020, 04:24 PM

Oh so very close....

BillP · #6 07-03-2020, 12:27 PM

Guys, I'm a bit behind on the half sheet part of the discussion. Supposedly there is a 132 card sheet of which I've been working on the 1st card in the row sequence and come up with 11 of those rows ( I believe), not sure on the 12th. Why again does there have to be another sheet or half sheet?

toppcat · #7 07-03-2020, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillP

Guys, I'm a bit behind on the half sheet part of the discussion. Supposedly there is a 132 card sheet of which I've been working on the 1st card in the row sequence and come up with 11 of those rows ( I believe), not sure on the 12th. Why again does there have to be another sheet or half sheet?

Topps printed two half sheets for each sheet in each series from 1952 until god knows when, Slit A and Slit B, even if the half sheets matched. Most standard size cards were done this way, including other sports and some if not all Non-Sports. 100 card slit from 1952-54, 110 from 1955-56 then 132 from 1957 on. After series-by-series distribution ended in 1973-74, the * and ** sheets still indicate there are two half sheets per "setup".

G1911 · #8 07-03-2020, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillP

Guys, I'm a bit behind on the half sheet part of the discussion. Supposedly there is a 132 card sheet of which I've been working on the 1st card in the row sequence and come up with 11 of those rows ( I believe), not sure on the 12th. Why again does there have to be another sheet or half sheet?

All the Topps sheets of this era were 264 cards. In the middle of a 264 sheet, there was a white gap; the first thing done after printing was to cut the sheet into two halves for easier handling (at least, I presume this was why, and why most uncut sheets surviving are really half sheets). Each of these half sheets would have 12 rows of 11 cards per row, 132 per half. In some years, we know that the two half sheets that made up one fully printed sheet did not have the same rows in the same places; usually done to balance things out and prevent or limit SP cards, presumably. At this point, I don't think we really have the evidence to say whether both halves were the same or different for 1966, just yet. So, there definitely were 2 half sheets, but it's possible they do directly mirror each other and are the same. More top/bottom miscuts should help us eventually solve this part of the puzzle, if we can keep turning them up.

This has become a great thread gentlemen, thank you all for crowdsourcing this and combining everything together

EDIT: Writing while Toppcat was replying too; what he said!

Kevvyg1026 · #9 07-05-2020, 05:23 AM

Howser is in column 3 and therefore must touch (be above) one of the following:584, 559, 547, 560, 575, or 545

Kevvyg1026 · #10 07-02-2020, 02:23 PM

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 · #11 07-02-2020, 02:42 PM

Quote:

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.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1985 Topps Baseball Uncut Sheet w/ Puckett RC * 1987 Uncut Sheets in Box	mintacular	1980 & Newer Sports Cards B/S/T	2	11-20-2017 02:22 PM
Topps uncut sheets	mybestbretts	Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present)	7	11-26-2014 01:30 PM
1972 Topps uncut partial sheets	SAllen2556	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	7	07-07-2014 12:50 PM
1955 Topps uncut sheets	chadeast	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	20	06-22-2012 09:52 AM
1952-60 Uncut Topps Sheets	Archive	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	2	01-07-2008 03:46 PM