68T Bill Stoneman variation

[goheels]

Does anyone have the variation that omits the following incomplete sentence on the back: "Bill was used sparingly but still"?

I have looked for this card for decades and haven't seen one. Would love to add to my collection but I will be very happy just to see one.

By my notes it was mentioned by Bert Sugar in the 1970s but I don't know if he found it first.

[ALR-bishop]

I had not heard about that one Carlton. In what form/publication did you see it mentioned ? Sounds a little like the elusive 1959 Hank Bauer yellow letter card, although I have seen a purported scan of that one.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Carlton, you may not have been looking in the right place for this variation, you should be checking the backs of the 68 Topps holiday rack packs listed on ebay.....I know of one collector who had some luck finding one of the rarer 68 Topps variations showing on one of these holiday rack packs.

Richard Dingman's list identifies this variation ....it is just not one that he has located either.

[goheels]

SCB, written by Bert Sugar
2nd edition, p 176

It lists only 6 variations for 1968:

No. 107 issues with "course" (sic) or "fine" 'cloth' background on front
No. 179 issued with or without incomplete sentence at end of biography: "Bill was used sparingly but still"
No. 258 issued with '1968 Rookie Stars' printed in orange or red
No. 278 issued with copyright printed on left or right side
No. 454 issued with two cropping forms of picture of Frank Robinson
No. 518 issued with No. 539 as American League or Major League Rookies

Interesting that it is the first mention of a cropping variation for a CL inset photo.
Only has variations for 4 of the 7 CLs.
As expected, while there are cropping variations for all CLs including the #67 1st series CL with Kaat, only the more blatant difference is mentioned, #107 being plain as day.

Here are the serial historical listings of variations in the Beckett/Eckes Sport Americana Price Guides:

1983, 5th edition, Casey Cox yellow team variation 66a, 66b

Dont have 1984 6th edition

1985, 7th edition adds CL 7 card 518a ML Rookies on 539, 518b AL Rookies on 539

1986, 8th edition adds nothing

1987, 9th edition adds Eddie Brinkman yellow team variation 49a, 49b
adds 107a as tan wide mesh and 107b as brown fine mesh
adds 356a CL 5 as head centered, 356b as head shifted right within circle
adds 454a CL 6 as cap complete within circle, 454b as cap partially within circle

1988, 10th edition adds 400a McCormick YL, 400b McCormick WL

Interesting that the Stoneman 179 card and the 258 are not mentioned. One would think that the list would be rolling and cumulative.

I don't have on hand any SA editions after that. Not sure when the #10 Lonborg/Lonberg was listed.

The Beckett/Eckes SA guide was the standard bearer in its day.

By 1991 with the proliferation of price guides went from books to family Bible size.

The Dick Gilkeson BB Card Variation Book Volume II, September 1989, lists the following 1968 variations:

10 Pitching Ldrs
49 Brinkman
66 Cox
67 1st CL
107 2nd CL
192 3rd CL
258 Cubs Rookies
278 4th CL
356 5th CL
400 McCormick
454 6th CL
518 7th CL

[goheels]

Thanks Larry. Do you know if they specifically found a Stoneman in the rack pack?

I have been looking for that card for almost 30 years. I betcha I have looked at 68 card backs in card shops in over 25 states--not sure if i should be proud or embarrassed about that one. Tons of MBs, a decent number of McCormicks, but not one Stoneman.

It may be the variation collector's Loch Ness Monster.

[ALR-bishop]

...add it to the 1959 Dodger Team card # 457 with Art Houtemann rather that Myer as card 483, and the 1959 Bill White with a traded notation on the back.

[goheels]

At least Gilkeson was doubtful about those 2 1959 cards. The 68 Stoneman had no such qualifier attached.

Chromosome errors that replicate may result in a tumor.

[ALR-bishop]

I do have two versions of every checklist for this set. Here are some other recurring oddities from that set. The Robinson and Arrigo have regular backs. Not sure how the Torborg got a 9 with no mention of the defect

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by goheels

Thanks Larry. Do you know if they specifically found a Stoneman in the rack pack?

I have been looking for that card for almost 30 years. I betcha I have looked at 68 card backs in card shops in over 25 states--not sure if i should be proud or embarrassed about that one. Tons of MBs, a decent number of McCormicks, but not one Stoneman.

It may be the variation collector's Loch Ness Monster.

Carlton, I am not aware of the Stoneman variation being found, but it was hopeful with the luck that you had finding a pack with the WL McCormick on top that it would carry over for you on locating the Stoneman.


With the #192 Yaz CL, what is the cause of the 4 variations?

Understandably, there would be two variations of this #192 CL as many CLs from the 1960s were produced/released with both the previous and current series. Do the additional two variations mean that each of these #192 checklists were actually DPs within each series(making them essentially Quadruple Prints-QPs) ?

[goheels]

Top 2 cards are same: clipped B on cap (also sliver of yellow at lower left part of inset circle from cropping), with THE on back

Bottom left: full B on cap, YOUR on back

Bottom right: clipped B, YOUR on back

Therefore there ARE four verified variations, I am missing full B on cap with THE on back.

Looks like lucky Al will have his done if he sends me his address for my duplicate.

Larry I would guess you are correct. We need to see a good picture of this 3rd (and second series) sheet, not the grainy ones I have seen before. Need enough detail to look for the cropping and would also need to see the back of the sheet.

Curious as to why Topps felt the need to change the message on the back slightly. The "GAME" on back version offers a little more clarity than the other version as to how the kid might play the game. Were both 2nd series (the 3rd series would have been a "chase" card in that sheet) and 3rd series sheets printed simultaneously? If Topps made an editorial decision to change the back message, at what point in the production would they have made the change?

When they have caught errors before and changed them, it was typically early on so that the error card is a little more rare (400 McCormick WL comes to mind, etc).