1991 Topps variations

[jacksoncoupage]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Hi Dylan,

Maybe I'm wrong about the Mattingly. I have opened a few boxes that I documented and kept separated and I thought I had a couple of Mattingly 101 hits variations in an earlier box. I have everything documented but I haven't looked all of the information over thoroughly yet. I do know that I have 25-30 Comstocks and only one is the Mariner variation.

I no longer have documentation but what I remember from my last big 1991 Topps experiment in 2015-2016 was that Topps had two different packaging types

• Picture Cards product
• Bubble Gum Cards product

Certain variations were found in only one of those packaging types (Whiten, Drabek, Hoiles errors for example) while their common corrected versions could be found in both packaging types. Meanwhile, other variation-affected cards could be found in both types of packaging, also in both their error or corrected version depending on what time in the print run.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage

I no longer have documentation but what I remember from my last big 1991 Topps experiment in 2015-2016 was that Topps had two different packaging types

• Picture Cards product
• Bubble Gum Cards product

Certain variations were found in only one of those packaging types (Whiten, Drabek, Hoiles errors for example) while their common corrected versions could be found in both packaging types. Meanwhile, other variation-affected cards could be found in both types of packaging, also in both their error or corrected version depending on what time in the print run.

The only variations that I haven't pulled from the Bubble Gum cards is the Bush no print code and the Whiten hand outside border. All of the other variations I have pulled from the Bubble Gum Cards products.

[Pat R]

I just finished comparing the information on a couple of boxes that I opened and it seems apparent that it's as much about where they were printed as it is when with some of the variations.

Both boxes were from a later printing and both were 15 count cellos.

With the variations that I outlined in red boxes if everything was printed in the same place some of the variations would had to have been corrected and then become incorrect a 2nd time which seems highly unlikely.

I would speculate that the glow back sheets were printed in a different place/area from the non glow back sheets.

[IMG][/IMG]

[Pat R]

I just finished going through a 34 count cello box that I had opened a few weeks ago and now I am certain that I am right about some of the variations being printed at the same time but in different areas.

It is an interesting box with 1/2 of the B sheet cards having bold no glow logos and the other 1/2 glow no bold. Also there wasn't a single E or F sheet card in the entire box.

All of these cards came from that box
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[Rich Klein]

Just a reminder that I do my best to add variations I can figure out (not just in 1991 Topps) to the COMC Data Base. You can either

1) Send Correction Requests to get variations in

2) DM me here. I know Dylan does DM me at times and we have conversations as appropriate

Rich

[Pat R]

Here's a Jesse Orosco variation from an early box that came before the hand-drawn 5 in the 1984 strikeouts.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[ALR-bishop]

Fascinating stuff in this thread about what is now a 30 + year old set. At the same time I have been following the research of another member on the printing processes and oddities of the 70 year old 52 set. Am enjoying watching both efforts. I have to think the Topps people that put these sets would be amazed at the deep dives into stuff they likely viewed as very basic get the product out the door process