NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-29-2020, 07:33 PM
G1911 G1911 is offline
Gr.eg McCl.@y
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 7,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JollyElm View Post
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.
Just noting that the "White Sox" miscut must have been on a 6th series sheet, not a 7th, due to the bright white stock that was not used for the 7th series. It's possible both versions were issued in series 7 until we finish a sheet layout and can then know one way or another; but this particular example certainly was a 6th series card.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-29-2020, 08:38 PM
Cliff Bowman's Avatar
Cliff Bowman Cliff Bowman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Near Atlanta
Posts: 3,113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911 View Post
Just noting that the "White Sox" miscut must have been on a 6th series sheet, not a 7th, due to the bright white stock that was not used for the 7th series. It's possible both versions were issued in series 7 until we finish a sheet layout and can then know one way or another; but this particular example certainly was a 6th series card.
It has to be #518 Braves Rookies above the #517 Checklist White Sox version, it is the only rookie card between 447-522 with a violet(?) name stripe and neither of the two team cards in that series have a violet(?) stripe.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 66topps517whitesoxA.jpg (33.6 KB, 94 views)
__________________
“interesting to some absolute garbage to others.” —- “Error cards and variations are for morons, IMHO.”
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-29-2020, 09:30 PM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Cardboard Land
Posts: 8,320
Default

The stripe is definitely light blue. In fact, it seems to be just a tad darker than the light blue in the body of the checklist.

Here's #518 stuck above the #517 in question. The colors are not a match...

517518comparison.jpg

My reason for wondering if "White Sox" versions of the checklist could have also appeared in the 7th series is because the card above could possibly (but most likely doubtfully) be the #526 Twins team. if you look towards the left (of the original pic, not the one posted here), there is blue over there too, matching the setup of the team cards and the rookie cards with the angled color stripe. Was there a team card in blue in the 6th series, and/or is there a different card that has a blue 'nameplate' and also a blue stripe (or whatever) on the upper left side?? If there's a 'blue' rookies card in the 6th series, than that's probably it, right?

This crap is fascinating!!!!
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land

https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm

Looking to trade? Here's my bucket:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel

Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s.

Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-29-2020, 09:44 PM
Cliff Bowman's Avatar
Cliff Bowman Cliff Bowman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Near Atlanta
Posts: 3,113
Default

The #518 Braves Rookies is the only team or rookies card from #447-522 with a similar color, all of the other team and rookies cards in that series are colors nowhere even close.
__________________
“interesting to some absolute garbage to others.” —- “Error cards and variations are for morons, IMHO.”

Last edited by Cliff Bowman; 08-29-2020 at 09:46 PM. Reason: Missed a word
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-29-2020, 09:54 PM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Cardboard Land
Posts: 8,320
Default

Here's more food for thought...that adds even more wrinkles to the problem. The checklist has the red/magenta plate very much misaligned, so it's possible that the light blue stripe on the card above it could very well supposed to be violet/purple (or perhaps a different color?), but the red is missing (and would have been printed above the blue sliver that is visible). There's no way to know if the blue we see is as it's supposed to be, or if it is missing a part of its color makeup. This logical hole keeps getting deeper.
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land

https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm

Looking to trade? Here's my bucket:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel

Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s.

Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-29-2020, 10:00 PM
Cliff Bowman's Avatar
Cliff Bowman Cliff Bowman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Near Atlanta
Posts: 3,113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JollyElm View Post
Here's more food for thought...that adds even more wrinkles to the problem. The checklist has the red/magenta plate very much misaligned, so it's possible that the light blue stripe on the card above it could very well supposed to be violet/purple (or perhaps a different color?), but the red is missing (and would have been printed above the blue sliver that is visible). There's no way to know if the blue we see is as it's supposed to be, or if it is missing a part of its color makeup. This logical hole keeps getting deeper.
If anyone knows what color you get when you mix red with light blue then we can nail it .
__________________
“interesting to some absolute garbage to others.” —- “Error cards and variations are for morons, IMHO.”
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-29-2020, 10:10 PM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Cardboard Land
Posts: 8,320
Default

One other thing of note. If you examine the blue sliver above the checklist, it is undoubtedly much thinner than the width (or is it height since the card is sideways??) of the team nameplates, so I have no problem concluding it is a rookies card up there...whether ultimately blue, violet/purple, or something else.
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land

https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm

Looking to trade? Here's my bucket:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel

Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s.

Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow.

Last edited by JollyElm; 08-29-2020 at 10:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-29-2020, 11:07 PM
Bigdaddy's Avatar
Bigdaddy Bigdaddy is offline
+0m J()rd@N
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 2,077
Default

I'm suggesting that instead of referring to the checklist as W. Sox or White Sox, that we refer to it as Cards or Cardinals.

Interesting to note that both the White Sox and Cardinals finished with the same W/L record in 1966 - 83/79.

Ok, something to add to the thread - if you look at the number 518 above closely, you can see that the right (bottom) side of the nameplate has a slight blue tint while the left side (top) has a more red tint. This could correspond to a slight shift of the red ink (we've seen that before) to the left (top) of the card. And given the strong shift of red in the #517 checklist, you could see where that purple nameplate would appear light blue.

Am I crazy? NVM, don't answer that.
__________________
Working Sets:
Baseball-
T206 SLers - Virginia League (-1)
1952 Topps - low numbers (-1)
1953 Topps (-54)
1954 Bowman (-2)
1964 Topps Giants auto'd (-2)

Last edited by Bigdaddy; 08-29-2020 at 11:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-01-2020, 04:15 PM
Kevvyg1026 Kevvyg1026 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 658
Default 1966 topps highs

Here's why I believe 525 is in the row C (Hoerner) below 561 (which is in Perranowski row).

1966_561_Bell.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-10-2020, 07:34 AM
Kevvyg1026 Kevvyg1026 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 658
Default 1966 High number miscut

Found this miscut on #586 today. Any ideas which card might be below it?


1966_586_Bottom.JPG

1966_586_bottom_back.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-10-2020, 08:19 AM
Kevvyg1026 Kevvyg1026 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 658
Default 1966 topps highs

Also found this. Any suggestions as to what card might be at left? The cards that are still not placed are: 528, 532 (but this has 552 on its right), 538, 541, 552, 556, 566, 569 (but I suspect it can't be this card), 570, 576, 586, 590.

1966_517_MC.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-11-2020, 08:04 AM
Kevvyg1026 Kevvyg1026 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 658
Default

The miscut to the checklist left cannot be 586 (now above 583) or 532 (left of 552).

I am also surprised that the cards above and/or below the checklist haven't been identified as it would seem that a miscut would clearly show the complete yellow (front) or the carmine (?) back. And since the checklist is in column 11, most of the possibilities of the top/bottom card above it are rookie cards.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-14-2020, 11:24 AM
BillP BillP is offline
Bill par.sons
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 276
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevvyg1026 View Post
Also found this. Any suggestions as to what card might be at left? The cards that are still not placed are: 528, 532 (but this has 552 on its right), 538, 541, 552, 556, 566, 569 (but I suspect it can't be this card), 570, 576, 586, 590.

Attachment 417788
I'm going with 538 to the left of the checklist based on the color and the top right corner boarder.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-10-2020, 08:40 AM
Kevvyg1026 Kevvyg1026 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 658
Default

I was wondering if this might be above Tigers team, #583??
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-10-2020, 08:41 AM
Kevvyg1026 Kevvyg1026 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 658
Default

I am referring to the Raymond card miscut, #586.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-15-2024, 06:48 AM
deweyinthehall deweyinthehall is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 1,250
Default

.

Last edited by deweyinthehall; 03-15-2024 at 06:50 AM. Reason: .
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-15-2024, 08:05 AM
stlcardsfan stlcardsfan is offline
D.an Jackso.n
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Near the STL
Posts: 828
Default

It really surprises me the W. Sox and Cards rookies checklist does not sell for a big premium compared to the other 7th series checklist. Especially considering its location in the G. Jackson row.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:20 PM.


ebay GSB