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

[Kevvyg1026]

As mentioned in an earlier Post, the 67 highs most likely had one row printed 5x, one row 4x, and the other five rows 3x. Then, all the other factors mentioned above also came into play.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

As mentioned in an earlier Post, the 67 highs most likely had one row printed 5x, one row 4x, and the other five rows 3x. Then, all the other factors mentioned above also came into play.

I'm thinking the fifth 5X row was a last minute sub for one of the others. It's too out of sequence, even for Topps, otherwise.

[JollyElm]

Updated...

[BillP]

thx, I think the 598 583 569 can go in next to bell and 595 below 598 next time you update.

thx for this graphic.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by BillP

thx, I think the 598 583 569 can go in next to bell and 595 below 598 next time you update.

thx for this graphic.

If those are definite, LMK and I'll add them right now.

[Kevvyg1026]

I believe you should merge the two images into one. The one headed by Northrup goes on top, then the image leading with Roggenburk etc goes at the bottom of the other image. That row with Roggenburk is the tail end of the Taylor row.

Such a mosh up would represent the first eight rows of one of the slits. The pattern Northrup, Perranowsi, Hoerner, Taylor, Salmon, Northrup, Mantilla, Shirley is accurate.

There are also miscuts that support Row B, headed by Perranowski, being under Row G, headed by Shirley. And there are miscuts that show some cards from the Salmon row are at bottom of the sheet.

So, one slit is pretty much guaranteed to look like (leading card given): Northrup, Perranowski, Hoerner, Taylor, Salmon, Northrup, Mantilla, Shirley, Perrnowski, Hoerner, Taylor, Salmon.

[Kevvyg1026]

Here's a miscut of the 7th series checklist which shows that it is at the edge of a sheet. Hence,it must be at the end of either row B (Perranowski), row C (Hoerner), or row G (Shirley).

1966_517_edge.jpg

[Kevvyg1026]

The pattern I observed for many of the 77 card print series was as follows:

Slit 1: A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E
Slit 2: x1, x2, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G

x1 & x2 varied between series and year but I have not seen any pattern to that Topps procedure other than that shown above.

In 1965, series 5, x1 & x2 were row B and row C (Blanchard & Drabowsky); in 1965, series 7, x1 & x2 were row C (Wyatt) and row E (Hiller). I have not acquired enough information to determine the pattern used in series 6.

In 1966, I haven't completely determine the pattern for series 5, but the row with Downing and the row with Kuenn are repeated at the top of a sheet, so I think that x1 & x2 were rows B & C. I don't have sufficient information for series 6, but for series 7, the miscuts and information I've seen, lead me to think that x1 & x2 were rows D & E (taylor & Salmon).

and for series 6, 1969, x1 & x2 were C (newman) & D (green).

In 1967, they used rows A (Pinson) & F (Rohr) for x1 & x2 at the top of the 2nd slit in series 7.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026

The pattern I observed for many of the 77 card print series was as follows:

Slit 1: A, B, C, D, E, A, F, G, B, C, D, E
Slit 2: x1, x2, A, F, G, B, C, D, E, A, F, G

x1 & x2 varied between series and year but I have not seen any pattern to that Topps procedure other than that shown above.

In 1965, series 5, x1 & x2 were row B and row C (Blanchard & Drabowsky); in 1965, series 7, x1 & x2 were row C (Wyatt) and row E (Hiller). I have not acquired enough information to determine the pattern used in series 6.

In 1966, I haven't completely determine the pattern for series 5, but the row with Downing and the row with Kuenn are repeated at the top of a sheet, so I think that x1 & x2 were rows B & C. I don't have sufficient information for series 6, but for series 7, the miscuts and information I've seen, lead me to think that x1 & x2 were rows D & E (taylor & Salmon).

and for series 6, 1969, x1 & x2 were C (newman) & D (green).

In 1967, they used rows A (Pinson) & F (Rohr) for x1 & x2 at the top of the 2nd slit in series 7.

This 100% matches up for 1967. The 5X of row A is weird and probably unintended originally and the Belanger row used to cause people fits before eBay (I recall posting about the row years ago and Ted Z mentioned all 11 cards in that row were the last ones he obtained). But this explains the row distributions from canvassing eBay-well done!

[JollyElm]

Not sure if this helps the effort at all, but after digging through all of my doubles, I found miscuts of both versions of #517. Unfortunately, they each only show a tiny, tiny bit of an adjoining card, but who knows...

1966topps517wsoxA.jpg1966topps517wsoxB.jpg

1966topps517whitesoxA.jpg1966topps517whitesoxB.jpg

On the "White Sox" card, it is clearly beneath a rookies card with a light blue nameplate, or a team card.

[Kevvyg1026]

Thanks. The White Sox version is from the series 6 printing. However, the RCs in that series are: Cubs, Orioles, Red Sox, Yankees, Giants (511), Pirates, & Braves (518). The team cards are: Phillies & A's.

The W. Sox card is interesting. The blue at top edge may eliminate 552, 556, 570, and 590 from being adjacent to the checklist, but 528, 538, 541 (too light?), 566, & 586 are certainly still possibilities.

[JollyElm]

I remember reading posts in this thread regarding "White Sox" being a part of the sixth series printing, but let me play devil's advocate for a moment. Is it possible that that version could have also appeared in the last series (along with the "W. Sox" cards)? Since there was no 'future' checklist to print, because it was the last series of cards for the year, did they double up on #517...and possibly have the two different versions coming off of the presses at the same time? I mean, is there a way to definitively rule out that scenario, circumstantial evidence aside? That would really throw a monkey wrench into the works, wouldn't it? Ha ha.