|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
PSA had told me that to grade a 'variation' there had to be 2 articles published about a card and they did not consider variations that were not intended (my interpretation). Not sure what that means as they now grade the Yellow House variation, do not grade the Campos Top Border variation and will grade the red star black star variation.
The skeptics would say it is so they can make money at a later date when they start to accept the major variations, so they can get additional grading fees. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
A day later than I planned but I started looking at the 52 Topps Sniders with the COMC images.
As we keep learning things (or getting them brought to our attention) or seeing things, this is in line with some of the 1973 Topps printing issues we do list with gaps in the borders. So I'll find what we have and create the new listings A significant percent of all the cards we've received have that gap in the border. I don't think it's that rare but it's certainly just another challenge to the master set. Rich
__________________
Look for our show listings in the Net 54 Calendar section Last edited by Rich Klein; 04-15-2024 at 10:34 AM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Remember in their earlier years they just used T206 but especially after this board started saying, hey do something about the backs, they want to adding the back information to the T206 nomenclature
__________________
Look for our show listings in the Net 54 Calendar section Last edited by Rich Klein; 04-15-2024 at 10:31 AM. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
And I'm probably setting a record for consecutive posts in any thread but if anyone wants to guide me as to whom in 52s to separate with those Gaps, I'll break them all out for COMC
Rich
__________________
Look for our show listings in the Net 54 Calendar section |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Hey Rich,
Yes I've emailed PSA numerous times about variations and getting changes to the 1952 Topps Master List registry. They do not consider N54 to be a legit published source of info. However, they do consider their own blogs as a legit source. It is just difficult to get variations recognized. The N54 1952 Topps Rolling Variations thread does not officially state what constitutes a variation - just that certain anomalies from the standard printing exist. On another note, I have never seen a red stripe variation, but the old timers recognize a variation if 10 or more exist. The red strip variations at one time were collected. And I am not sure I have ever seen a red strip variation - but they are out there |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Someone should be appointed or elected to officially define a variation.
And should we be upset that Net 54 is not a legitimate source of reliable published information ? What can we do to turn this around ? I personally think the 61 Ron Fairly with a green smudge in the baseball on the back of the card recognized as a variant by PSA should be the hobby standard. If we could just define it. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Frank house has a variation and a ln error!
If you think the psa registry has a ways to go. Glance at the weights for the signed set. They just copies the weights from the set. No regard for when the players died, signing habits, population...etc Good grief
__________________
"Trolling Ebay right now" © Always looking for signed 1952 topps as well as variations and errors |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
A print error variation, imho, should be a subest of the overall Variation category. A Variation "should" include variations in printing or design, intentional or not, that occurs more than a set # of times. A variation that we can find 10 copies of seems to be a reasonable dividing line between a common variation and the ridiculous occurences Al-R was referring to earlier where only 1 copy exists. Thoughts? Consider this a proposal we can chime in and vote on......if other alternatives exist, please propose. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I collect any variants that are recurring and involve a difference from the regular issued card. Probably most of what I collect would pass the 10 rule, a few not.
I tend to view a variation and a card intentionally changed by the manufacturer, but that would include intentional additions or subtractions from the card, clean up of printing errors, and DP differences. But it is virtually impossible to tell if a printing error was intentionally changed or just ran its course, so like most definitions it is often hard to apply. And yes I know the hobby has haphazardly recognized many recurring unintentional print defects as variations. There are so many of them out there with 10 or more examples it would be hard to know where to start or how to prioritize.. other than starting with the ones Greg has :-) Last edited by ALR-bishop; 04-17-2024 at 07:47 AM. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Nope, that record is held by Archive, who just can't shut up sometimes.
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
I think it would be cool if somebody does an error and variation and print defect rundown for each year. Start a thread with each year set and lists all for each year in order. That would make it 10 times eaiser for everybody to see each year in order
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
We are going to sue!
__________________
"Trolling Ebay right now" © Always looking for signed 1952 topps as well as variations and errors |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
52 Topps cards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/144160280@N05/ http://www.net54baseball.com/album.php?albumid=922 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, kind of surprising since it screws up the price tracking sites if you can't distinguish between the 2 cards. However, I guess..as Al-R has said numerous times, is how do we define a variation?
Even the Huggins & Scott auction listing the 579 card "Master Set" most would say was not complete. The old timers included 700 cards in their master set. The Campos partial top border variation is probably the variation with the largest price difference between the 2 versions in the 1952 Topps set and at some point you have to wonder when PSA will start tracking it. The standards for classifying variations don't make a lot of sense to me. |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
52 Topps cards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/144160280@N05/ http://www.net54baseball.com/album.php?albumid=922 |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
The standards for classifying variations don't make a lot of sense to me.[/QUOTE]
"If you ever reach total enlightenment on what constitutes a true variation while drinking a beer, I bet it makes the beer shoot out of your nose"....Jack Handey ( with a minor adjustment) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
"Trolling Ebay right now" © Always looking for signed 1952 topps as well as variations and errors |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS - 1952 Topps Duke Snider PSA 7 | ccre | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 04-19-2023 08:33 AM |
F/S 1952 Topps Duke Snider SGC 7 centered | Raremintpaper | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 02-13-2022 09:32 AM |
F/S: 1952 Topps Duke Snider SGC 3 | bks14sr | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 10-02-2020 06:04 AM |
1952 Topps Lot of 12 (SOLD) Duke Snider | Head928 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 10-22-2016 12:13 PM |
FS: 1952 Topps Duke Snider #37 SGC 60 - $105 dlvd | x2drich2000 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 02-16-2015 09:45 AM |