Wrong backs in 2022 Topps base set

[darkhorse9]

I never really heard any answers to this, but why are there 36 cards in the Topps first series set that have their backs printed upside from the other cards in the set?
There is no such problem in the second series?

[John1941]

Because Topps has to release so many sets they're constantly rushed, and make tons of stupid little errors. No real reason.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by darkhorse9

I never really heard any answers to this, but why are there 36 cards in the Topps first series set that have their backs printed upside from the other cards in the set?
There is no such problem in the second series?

Just a guess. Are they all printed upside or can you find those 36 cards both ways? If both ways it could be some "special" short print version.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by John1941

Because Topps has to release so many sets they're constantly rushed, and make tons of stupid little errors. No real reason.

Agreed. They failed last year in Heritage putting the wrong backs on a ton by accident, as well.
https://www.comc.com/Cards,sr,=2021+...rong+back,i100

So either they laid out the print sheet wrong and then corrected it, or they printed entire sheets with the wrong set of backs at the factory presses.

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Agreed. They failed last year in Heritage putting the wrong backs on a ton by accident, as well.
https://www.comc.com/Cards,sr,=2021+...rong+back,i100

So either they laid out the print sheet wrong and then corrected it, or they printed entire sheets with the wrong set of backs at the factory presses.

if I'm reading the OP correctly, he is concerned because he has to "flip the card over" to read the back. I think that's because of the printing process

From what I heard, the Heritage Wrong Backs from 2022 came because of where Topps printed some of those cards (France) and those printers were not as experienced about card backs as the USA printing houses

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Just a guess. Are they all printed upside or can you find those 36 cards both ways? If both ways it could be some "special" short print version.

Hi Ben, while SPs can be hard to notice the CMP codes used on modern Topps can always confirm if anything is a true error or a short print.

The flipped stock on these is just poor QC and still a common issue 71 years later. Here is what I mean about CMP codes with this photo I found on the net.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Hi Ben, while SPs can be hard to notice the CMP codes used on modern Topps can always confirm if anything is a true error or a short print.

The flipped stock on these is just poor QC and still a common issue 71 years later. Here is what I mean about CMP codes with this photo I found on the net.

Thank you, I learned something new today. That is cool that Topps done that with CMP codes.

[swarmee]

Not always true. Topps does sometimes leave those codes the same on some variations, so while they're usually accurate, it is not perfect. And many people can't read text that small.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Not always true. Topps does sometimes leave those codes the same on some variations, so while they're usually accurate, it is not perfect. And many people can't read text that small.

Correct, it is not perfect but a great point of reference for unlisted sp’s and ssp’s. The codes tend to differ often if the card is noted with chance of pull. Just throwing out that a 1:300 pack pull (just an example) can have a specific number with something differing in those last three spots.

I find that the info is usually available with a quick net search after each release to answer most questions.

…and yes indeed, I certainly can’t read those without a loupe anymore, lol.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Correct, it is not perfect but a great point of reference for unlisted sp’s and ssp’s. The codes tend to differ often if the card is noted with chance of pull. Just throwing out that a 1:300 pack pull (just an example) can have a specific number with something differing in those last three spots.

I find that the info is usually available with a quick net search after each release to answer most questions.

…and yes indeed, I certainly can’t read those without a loupe anymore, lol.

Loupe, I was more thinking microscope at this point. I have actually quit collecting the 89 Fleer Randy Johnson errors because they are just too hard to see anymore.