1967 Topps High Numbers

[Kevvyg1026]

Another pattern that works is two rows 5x each, four rows 3x each, and one row 2x each. There are other patterns which also work, but this one would yield 22 cards printed a lot more than the others and 11 cards printed much less than most in the series.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

Another pattern that works is two rows 5x each, four rows 3x each, and one row 2x each. There are other patterns which also work, but this one would yield 22 cards printed a lot more than the others and 11 cards printed much less than most in the series.

This is what I believe happened. It fits what I have seen over the years in card populations. Without seeing the other half (2nd 132 card sheet), we will never know.

Just based on my personal experience, the 7th series 1967 Topps never came into our area. I believe it was one of if not the least distributed Series of Topps in 1954-1973. I think that Card Collectors Company got a larger than normal supply and were a main source for the hobby. Collectors who never saw the cards would have bought complete series creating an excess of double printed cards in one source. Just my theory.

[ALBB]

very interesting research !

[Kevvyg1026]

The only miscut I have shows Demeter with Carew underneath. Doesn't tell anything new since that is the same as what is shown on the half-sheet

[jmoran19]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

Another pattern that works is two rows 5x each, four rows 3x each, and one row 2x each. There are other patterns which also work, but this one would yield 22 cards printed a lot more than the others and 11 cards printed much less than most in the series.

Topps used a LOT of different layouts but I Personally Have never seen evidence of any other year use a layout where a row of cards was printed 5 times across the 264 card sheet and another row only twice.

[Kevvyg1026]

I understand that and I have not either. I was simply stating that it was possible and would lead to two rows being printed at a significantly higher rate than the others, while one row would be short printed.

The one half sheet I've seen for the 67 high numbers has five rows printed twice and two rows printed once.

I have only seen three rows of the second half-sheet and it has one of the double printed rows from the first half sheet printed twice, and one of the single printed rows printed once.

Thus, in the fifteen rows I've seen, one row was printed four times, five rows printed twice, and one row printed once. It will be interesting to see if the frequency of the remaining nine rows can be determined.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

I understand that and I have not either. I was simply stating that it was possible and would lead to two rows being printed at a significantly higher rate than the others, while one row would be short printed.

The one half sheet I've seen for the 67 high numbers has five rows printed twice and two rows printed once.

I have only seen three rows of the second half-sheet and it has one of the double printed rows from the first half sheet printed twice, and one of the single printed rows printed once.

Thus, in the fifteen rows I've seen, one row was printed four times, five rows printed twice, and one row printed once. It will be interesting to see if the frequency of the remaining nine rows can be determined.

You may have missed my scans above, which showed two more rows of the other sheet. It doesn't solve all but shows how weird the layout was for the 67 highs, gives us a second "Seaver row" a third "Bauer row", a confirmation at at least one row appears 4 times and gets us down to 7 unknown rows. So the Bauer Row (really fronted by Red Sox Rookies) is now known as appearing 3X while the Seaver row (fronted by Orioles Rookies) now shows up twice and the Pinson fronted row is 4X. The repeating pattern of the top four rows is interesting on the partial and the Bauer and Seaver rows are together on both half sheets. Flimsy evidence only two Seaver rows exit but to my mind this makes it at least possible.

Plenty of questions remain though. Did a production issue scotch a row and cause a weird pattern? Are the differing layouts related to how the cards were packed? DO certain rows suffer production issues causing them to sometimes be pulled and discarded?

[Kevvyg1026]

This is obviously pure speculation on my part but if Topps used a similar printing pattern to what they did in several other years, I expect the last seven rows on the second half-sheet to be headed by (in order): 557, 576, 580, 531, 550, 547, 558.

From what I have seen from 77 card print runs from 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969, Topps used a pattern (with seven unique rows labeled A thru G) like:


1. One half-sheet: A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E

2. 2nd half-sheet: variable two rows (in 1967 A, F), followed by A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G.

From what you have shown, this pattern seems to be appearing in 1967 as well. The first half-sheet has the pattern A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E while the other has: A, F, A, F, G. Thus, this five row snippet MIGHT be followed by B, C, D, E, A, F, G.

Unfortunately, no miscut information will identify if that is the pattern; only that it isn't. This is because row C is always underneath row B, row D is always under row C, etc. However, if a miscut is found that violates this pattern, that would be very helpful!!

If (and it is IF) this speculation is true, row A, with Pinson, would be printed five times across the two half sheets, row F (with Rohr) 4x, and five rows (Ferrara, Hernandez rookie, Colavito, Checklist, & Belanger rookie) 3x each.

This would make the cards in the Pinson row almost double-printed (5:3 ratio), while the cards in the Rohr row (4:3 ratio) printed at a slightly higher rate than those of the other 54 cards. The checklist, is naturally, printed at a higher frequency since it was also printed in the prior print run.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

Unfortunately, no miscut information will identify if that is the pattern; only that it isn't. This is because row C is always underneath row B, row D is always under row C, etc. However, if a miscut is found that violates this pattern, that would be very helpful!!

Yup, when I first posted this thread I thought it was possible a repeat portion of the array would make it impossible to use miscuts. One interesting idea from the suggested patterns you posted is that the Seaver row (G, or SP2 in my parlance) could be a bottom row on the unknown sheet. That might help explain why the cards in that row are really more of a short print than any other three-peat row. Some kind of production issue could have affected it for a press run or when cutting down into individual cards.

Checked my 67 set, no high number miscuts, or even close really.

[Bigdaddy]

So I went on to ComC and looked at the number of cards for sale for each of the '67s listed below to try to get some hard data for relative population numbers. This accounts for both slabbed and unslabbed cards. Probably the real outliers are the Seaver and Carew RCs, which I would imagine reside in higher numbers in PCs than most of the others. If you could define the relative printing of the card per sheet as 1X, 2X, 3X, 4X etc, then you could generate bins or buckets that each card would fall into based statistical analysis of the relative populations. Not perfect, but it does give more insight on the relative scarcity of the high numbers. And shows, statistically, why I had to pay through the nose for Mike Shannon.

SUBJECT B SHEET SCD BECKETT ComCpop
531 7TH SERIES CHECKLIST DP 23
534 BAUER SP DP DP 32
535 CLENDENON 13
536 CUBS ROOKIES (J. NIEKRO) 6
537 ESTRADA DP DP 22
538 MARTIN 8
539 EGAN SP DP DP 16
540 CASH 8
541 GIBBON 6
542 A'S ROOKIES (MONDAY) SP DP DP 18
543 SCHNEIDER 15
544 INDIANS TEAM 9
545 GRANT 9
546 WOODWARD 6
547 RED SOX ROOKIES SP DP DP 17
548 GONZALEZ DP DP 25
549 SANFORD 13
550 PINSON DP DP 14
551 CAMILLI DP DP 25
552 SAVAGE SP 7
553 YANKEES ROOKIES SP 10
554 RODGERS SP DP DP 21
555 CARDWELL 16
556 WEIS SP DP DP 18
557 FERRARA 13
558 ORIOLES ROOKIES (BELANGER) SP 17
559 TRACEWSKI DP DP 24
560 BUNNING 13
561 ALOMAR 9
562 BLASS SP DP DP 13
563 ADCOCK SP 13
564 ASTROS ROOKIES SP DP DP 12
565 KRAUSSE 4
566 GEIGER DP DP 31
567 HAMILTON (YANKEES) 12
568 SULLIVAN SP 8
569 A.L. ROOKIES (CAREW) DP DP 6
570 WILLS 13
571 SHERRY 10
572 DEMETER 13
573 WHITE SOX TEAM 6
574 BUCHEK 8
575 BOSWELL 4
576 N.L. ROOKIES 12
577 SHORT 8
578 BOCCABELLA 11
579 HENRY 18
580 COLAVITO 11
581 METS ROOKIES (SEAVER) SP 6
582 OWENS DP DP 30
583 BARKER (YANKEES) 12
584 PIERSALL 14
585 BUNKER 13
586 JIMINEZ SP 13
587 N.L. ROOKIES 12
588 KLIPPSTEIN SP DP DP 18
589 RICKETTS DP DP 24
590 RICHERT 12
591 CLINE SP 13
592 N.L. ROOKIES 15
593 WESTRUM 13
594 OSINSKI 19
595 ROJAS 16
596 CISCO SP DP DP 18
597 ABERNATHY SP 14
598 WHITE SOX ROOKIES 10
599 DULIBA DP DP 36
600 B. ROBINSON SP 9
601 BRYAN SP DP 26
602 PIZARRO 13
603 A'S ROOKIES SP 10
604 RED SOX TEAM 9
605 SHANNON 8
606 TAYLOR 19
607 STANLEY SP 17
608 CUBS ROOKIES DP DP 30
609 JOHN 16