Show...me...your print variations!

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by G1911

I would like to take this moment to apologize to Shane for my past behavior and conduct in discussing variations on cards of players who played for the Cardinals. It is with a heavy heart and great regret for my past conduct that I stand here today, taking responsibility for my cruel and thoughtless actions. Not only did I participate in discussions about variants on Cardinals cards, I went even further into transgression and occasionally shared a new one. I hope that I may some day be forgiven, if not in my time on Earth, then in the next life, but forgiveness is not needed for me to take ownership and admit to the shameful sin I have committed. It will never, ever happen again, maybe. Shane, definitely don’t look at post #2,397.

ROFL.....big time. ROFL.

Honorable man that Greg for owning up to his past transgressions. That is a heartfelt apology too.

And now I gotta go find another 72 variation.




Butch

[ALR-bishop]

Greg is just applying lessons learned from ErikV's pre war thread

[G1911]

Applying lessons learned, since there is no honor to be found in my actions that have contributed to the suffering of a fellow board member's collection. My apology is heartfelt though, and I hope will be taken into consideration at my sentencing. While I have brought shame and disgrace to the variations community, it has been a pleasure, gentlemen

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Greg is just applying lessons learned from ErikV's pre war thread

Ohhh, it was not lost on me. An excellent example for sure.

Butch

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by G1911

Applying lessons learned, since there is no honor to be found in my actions that have contributed to the suffering of a fellow board member's collection. My apology is heartfelt though, and I hope will be taken into consideration at my sentencing. While I have brought shame and disgrace to the variations community, it has been a pleasure, gentlemen

I for one am quick to forgive.

Regards,

I found 2 Bob's. Not easy to come by either, but the are out there for sure.

Butch

[G1911]

Originally Posted by butchie_t

I for one am quick to forgive.

Regards,

I found 2 Bob's. Not easy to come by either, but the are out there for sure.

Butch

Thank goodness, for I may need forgiveness very quick here! Shane, look away man

There's a lot of sub variants of the Gibson, one more common one that really only has a white slash through the "I" in "MINOR" and then there's what I think is a tougher one where most of the white streaking is focused over the cartoon's text.

[butchie_t]

I just picked up these two.

Shane, the new guy started it. I am just providing these for historical reference...cough.

Butch

[frankhardy]

I will have to go to my chamber and think this one over. When I come back I will have my decision.

(I've seen too much Judge Wopner as a kid!)

I have to say, Greg..... That cracked me up!

[frankhardy]

In review of this case....

I see that I need to get caught up on finding....

1959 Topps Alex Grammas (light transitional blob)

1953 Topps Wilmer Mizell ("runs" partially missing)

1972 Topps Bob Gibson (missing ink on back; multiple versions)

[G1911]

Originally Posted by frankhardy

In review of this case....

I see that I need to get caught up on finding....

1959 Topps Alex Grammas (light transitional blob)

1953 Topps Wilmer Mizell ("runs" partially missing)

1972 Topps Bob Gibson (missing ink on back; 2 versions)

I really shouldn't say this as you're considering sentencing, but the Gibson is one of those variants that has tons of different versions of it. Whatever exactly happened here, the white slashing comes in tons of different patterns, and you could probably get a couple dozen different versions of it.

[Tedwilliams1918]

I think for 1972 Gibson a piece of dirt or something got stuck on the print plate and moved around which is why there are soo many different varieties or the variation

[Tedwilliams1918]

.

[Tedwilliams1918]

Just wondering, do any of you guys have sandy with extra sand behind his ear?

[G1911]

I’ve ignored the Koufax sand, because I don’t want to buy another expensive Koufax or two lol. So he sits on my list unchecked off

[Cliff Bowman]

I have no clue on this one, but it is recurring https://www.ebay.com/itm/23224222556...Bk9SR4L6koyfYQ and although the other one is better centered it's priced just a wee bit too steep for me. It looks like the green wasn't printed on the bottom half of the card for some reason, causing the no name error. If the surrounding cards on the uncut sheet were also affected it would seem they would have also shown up by now.

[Tedwilliams1918]

This was topps trial run on 1990 frank Thomas nnof 🤣

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

I have no clue on this one, but it is recurring https://www.ebay.com/itm/23224222556...Bk9SR4L6koyfYQ and although the other one is better centered it's priced just a wee bit too steep for me. It looks like the green wasn't printed on the bottom half of the card for some reason, causing the no name error. If the surrounding cards on the uncut sheet were also affected it would seem they would have also shown up by now.

This is a really cool one. “A wee bit too steep”, but maybe it’s something not too bad and I could make an offer on. So I click the link. Lol. Lmao.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

It looks like the green wasn't printed on the bottom half of the card for some reason, causing the no name error.

Nice find, I am thinking you meant blue rather than green

[MikeGarcia]

..you may have to squint a little to make it out but I think I've found out the exact size of the 1952 Topps gum piece in the packs. These things bought Buick Roadmasters and Chrysler Imperials for a lot of dentists back in the fifties.

[Tedwilliams1918]

On this card the more ted the better I believed he touches sid Hudson who also has a similar problem, unfortunately some kid Carried this one in his pocket lol

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

Nice find, I am thinking you meant blue rather than green

The top of the error card obviously has a blue tint, but what I was going by is the long rectangle where his name should be, on the regular card it is green with yellow letters, on the error card it is just yellow.

[JollyElm]

The blue and yellow combine to make green.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

The blue and yellow combine to make green.

Whoops, brain fart on my part.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

Whoops, brain fart on my part.

We can both edit out our posts so no one will the the wiser.

[frankhardy]

As I was pondering the case of the wanton posting of Cardinals variations in violation of the new law....and I was considering what kind of punishment should be passed down....

...I was in the process of searching my extras in my collection (in which I found none), and also in the process of scouring the internetwebs to fill the voids in which certain posters shed light on...

...I too have discovered a variation. Yes....it is a Cardinals variation. I have found ANOTHER variation on the 1959 Topps Alex Grammas. There is a reoccurring white donut print defect in the bottom left blue area very close to the photo and directly above the "NA" in CARDINALS. I have purchased this one and it is on it's way to my humble collection.

Also, while doing this I discovered that my "plain ole' regular Grammas was actually the "light transitional blob" version. Therefore I had to purchase a "regular plain" one. It is also on the way.

Having said all of that....since I am now guilty of the same crime of bringing to light further Cardinals variations....I hereby deem the new law null and void. It is now repealed! Isn't that how it's done in real life?

Carry on!

[G1911]

Originally Posted by frankhardy

As I was pondering the case of the wanton posting of Cardinals variations in violation of the new law....and I was considering what kind of punishment should be passed down....

...I was in the process of searching my extras in my collection (in which I found none), and also in the process of scouring the internetwebs to fill the voids in which certain posters shed light on...

...I too have discovered a variation. Yes....it is a Cardinals variation. I have found ANOTHER variation on the 1959 Topps Alex Grammas. There is a reoccurring white donut print defect in the bottom left blue area very close to the photo and directly above the "NA" in CARDINALS. I have purchased this one and it is on it's way to my humble collection.

Also, while doing this I discovered that my "plain ole' regular Grammas was actually the "light transitional blob" version. Therefore I had to purchase a "regular plain" one. It is also on the way.

Having said all of that....since I am now guilty of the same crime of bringing to light further Cardinals variations....I hereby deem the new law null and void. It is now repealed! Isn't that how it's done in real life?

Carry on!

I am absolutely outraged that the Judge has committed the same crime. I am so mad that it is distracting my attention from my other tab where I’m shopping for said new recurring defect.

Perhaps we should instill a new blanket rule. Anyone who has the temerity to discuss a new card has to buy everyone else in the thread a copy of it too.

[ejstel]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

The top of the error card obviously has a blue tint, but what I was going by is the long rectangle where his name should be, on the regular card it is green with yellow letters, on the error card it is just yellow.

Same Seller also has this 1980 nettles no name for 48$ ...isnt that a deal or is the no position version that is expensive....

https://www.ebay.com/itm/23402491540...mis&media=COPY



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by ejstel

Same Seller also has this 1980 nettles no name for 48$ ...isnt that a deal or is the no position version that is expensive....

https://www.ebay.com/itm/23402491540...mis&media=COPY



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

He has a BUNCH of 1980 Topps cards with no names that I am very skeptical of. I can't think of any logical reason why all of those cards would be printed without names when the same ink is not missing from the rest of the card. I might be opening myself up to a libel case but I suspect that someone either removed the names with an eraser or used chemicals to remove the names. Here are scans of a few of them.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

He has a BUNCH of 1980 Topps cards with no names that I am very skeptical of. I can't think of any logical reason why all of those cards would be printed without names when the same ink is not missing from the rest of the card. I might be opening myself up to a libel case but I suspect that someone either removed the names with an eraser or used chemicals to remove the names. Here are scans of a few of them.

You nailed it. You can see the names are actually still there in these pictures, just very very faint.

The seller can get in line and sue me.

[frankhardy]

Originally Posted by G1911

I am absolutely outraged that the Judge has committed the same crime. I am so mad that it is distracting my attention from my other tab where I’m shopping for said new recurring defect.

Perhaps we should instill a new blanket rule. Anyone who has the temerity to discuss a new card has to buy everyone else in the thread a copy of it too.

LOL!

As I spent about 2 hours last night, and most of this morning searching for these variations, I am reminded - I have a disease.

However, it helps to know that we all have this thread as a support group because....we're all nuts!

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by G1911

You nailed it. You can see the names are actually still there in these pictures, just very very faint.

The seller can get in line and sue me.

The removals look too neat too. All the ones I see are not that clean.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

He has a BUNCH of 1980 Topps cards with no names that I am very skeptical of. I can't think of any logical reason why all of those cards would be printed without names when the same ink is not missing from the rest of the card. I might be opening myself up to a libel case but I suspect that someone either removed the names with an eraser or used chemicals to remove the names. Here are scans of a few of them.

Looked through those 1980s no name cards last night, have one word for them: ALTERED

The Rice is the most obvious one, Rice's missing name should be in red ink, so if the red ink was missing from the top edge of the card, then the position banner just to the left of the name would not be purple but would be blue. Also the red is present in the "All-Star" banner just below. Highly unlikely the red run was missed side to side AND up and down effecting just the area where the name is. Spread this across so many of these 1980 cards, they are clearly altered...my guess by sun light. I'll add a red letter 1980 card to my window.

[savedfrommyspokes]

In follow-up, I tried an eraser on a red letter card and (you can see the results below), I feel sun light was used to fade out most the red. Sun light does give a "neat and clean" appearance, not so much with the eraser I used. Most of his missing name cards are missing red names, but a few orange also (83T) . Yellow and then red are typically the two easiest colors to fade via sun light. IMO, using sun light would fade the yellow to white and the red would likely fade to what you see on his cards. Since he is not offering any cards with either a blue or black name (outside of the 80 Pryor) only names printed in red and yellow, it is fairly obvious these are not legit.

I added a 1980 RL card to my window.....

[ALR-bishop]

Multi Peppers. There are more

[frankhardy]

I have been going through my team set spreadsheet to try and look again for those that I haven't been able to find in the past. I also have noted those that I am not sure are reoccurring.

My first question - is the 1957 Topps Murry Dickson (red ball/blob in stats) reoccurring?

If it is and someone has one, could you post a scan or at least describe it? I may have found one, but I am not sure of what I am looking for.

= = =

I AM REALLY TIRE OF LOOKING AT THE BACKS OF 1957 Topps Murry Dickson CARDS!!!!!!!

[frankhardy]

Also...

How about a 1963 Topps Bobby Shantz with a red stain on his face. I've never seen one. Is it the main picture or the inset picture? Is it reoccurring?

[frankhardy]

Got another one that is reoccurring -

1964 Topps #24 Carl Sawatski with the green bleeding up into the bottom of his name and also bleeding up into his neck.

Can anyone confirm is there is a reoccurring one of a white letter first "S" in his last name? I can't even find one.

[frankhardy]

Got a couple of more reoccurring -

1964 Topps #183 Ron Taylor (print donut between name & position)

1964 Topps #211 Jim Coker (two yellow donuts; before and after name)

1964 Topps #211 Jim Coker (yellow donut after last name)

= = =

Can someone confirm as reoccurring a 1964 Topps Jim Coker with a yellow swirly blob under and on his last name?

[Tedwilliams1918]

A chart I made from all my favorites on eBay

[Tedwilliams1918]

Missing black stamp on his characters face

[Sliphorn]

Originally Posted by frankhardy

Also...

How about a 1963 Topps Bobby Shantz with a red stain on his face. I've never seen one. Is it the main picture or the inset picture? Is it reoccurring?

Here is the scan of the normal and red stained face versions.

[frankhardy]

Originally Posted by Sliphorn

Here is the scan of the normal and red stained face versions.

Thanks. Now I know what to look for.

Reoccurring, right?

[Tedwilliams1918]

He probably was running late and did his make up wrong 🤣

I’m gonna have to try and find 1!

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by Tedwilliams1918

On this card the more ted the better I believed he touches sid Hudson who also has a similar problem, unfortunately some kid Carried this one in his pocket lol

I saw the Hudson you posted earlier, is that what you are referring to as similar to the Sandlock, or something else

[Tedwilliams1918]

Yea on Hudson but it get confusing from there….some of Hudson have a lot more black than that and sandlock has varrying red…..sandlock is a triple print and Hudson is maybe a double print so I believe there might of been another card that matches up to them…..also did you see my 1954 Sid Hudson with the black face impossible to obtain one shows up like every 3 years or so

[Tedwilliams1918]

https://vintagebaseballcardvariation...ibextid=Zxz2cZ

[Tedwilliams1918]

Black face

[Tedwilliams1918]

Just bought this on my Facebook group….has the logo in purple and has the white bulge in the yellow rectangle

[Tedwilliams1918]

Really helps explain hudson/sandlock

[Sliphorn]

Originally Posted by frankhardy

Thanks. Now I know what to look for.

Reoccurring, right?

I am not sure as I bought from a seller who had it. I had a search on eBay that never turned any up.