NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on Ebay
Pre-WWII Cards
Post WWII Cards
Vintage Memorabilia
Babe Ruth Cards
Ty Cobb Cards
Lou Gehrig Cards
Mickey Mantle Cards
Goudey Cards
Bowman Cards
T205s on Ebay
Tobacco "T" Cards
Caramel "E" Cards
Vintage Baseball Postcards
Football Cards on Ebay
Exhibit Cards
Strip Cards
Baking Cards
Sporting News
Playball Cards on Ebay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-06-2016, 07:30 AM
tedzan tedzan is offline
Ted Zanidakis
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Pennsylvania & Maine
Posts: 8,276
Default 1972 T0PPS test set of 1953 reprints

I am curious as to how rare this set is. It's been reported that TOPPS issued only 300 sets in 1972.

If this is true, then these 8 cards probably rank high as one of the most scarcest post-WWII issues.

I'm wondering how many collectors on this forum have any (or all 8) of them ?

Here is my set of them....


.




Hey guys....show us your cards.


TED Z
.

Last edited by tedzan; 09-06-2016 at 07:35 AM. Reason: Correct typo.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-06-2016, 07:46 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default

I have the set, and think I saw most if not all of a set on eBay recently ( offered as singles). I see them offered on eBay from time to time, not infrequently I think.

I still think there has to be more to the story behind this set where 3 of only 8 cards are mis identified. . The idea they had these 8 pictures but wanted to upgrade the set with better named players to market it on a test basis in Brooklyn hoping no one would notice seems far fetched .

Do we know of any other hobby publications that noted the issuance or release of the set ?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-06-2016, 08:12 AM
Griffins Griffins is offline
Anthøny N. ex
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,159
Default

I've got a full set now, and at one point about 8 years ago had 3 sets.
Here's mine, I've upgraded the Newhouser shown but don't have a scan of the new one.


Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-06-2016, 08:16 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default




Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-06-2016, 09:41 AM
moeson moeson is offline
Howie Schenker
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 418
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
I have the set, and think I saw most if not all of a set on eBay recently ( offered as singles). I see them offered on eBay from time to time, not infrequently I think.

I still think there has to be more to the story behind this set where 3 of only 8 cards are mis identified. . The idea they had these 8 pictures but wanted to upgrade the set with better named players to market it on a test basis in Brooklyn hoping no one would notice seems far fetched .

Do we know of any other hobby publications that noted the issuance or release of the set ?
I checked my run of Ballcard Collector and found these two:


Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-06-2016, 10:21 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default

Good input again Howie.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-06-2016, 10:30 AM
Griffins Griffins is offline
Anthøny N. ex
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,159
Default

When all the reports of this set clearly state they were issued in '72 how did they get to be known as a '73 set?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-06-2016, 10:57 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default Scd

I assume because it originally was listed that way in the SCD Catalog.

On a lot of the offbeat Topps sets there has been ongoing debate about year of production, year of release, or whether they were released over a period of time.

I think this is a fascinating and mysterious set
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-06-2016, 12:12 PM
egri's Avatar
egri egri is offline
Sco.tt Mar.cus
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 655
Default

I thought the last paragraph in the first photo Howie posted was interesting, about how age must be factored in to grading.

I'm also curious about Topps mislabeling three of the cards. If they were going to upgrade the players and hope no one would notice, I would think that they would choose a better player than Clyde McCullough.
__________________
Signed 1953 Topps set: 258/274 (94.16 %)
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-06-2016, 12:29 PM
Griffins Griffins is offline
Anthøny N. ex
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by egri View Post
I thought the last paragraph in the first photo Howie posted was interesting, about how age must be factored in to grading.

I'm also curious about Topps mislabeling three of the cards. If they were going to upgrade the players and hope no one would notice, I would think that they would choose a better player than Clyde McCullough.

that was my thought too- Paige and Robinson make sense, but Peanuts Lowrey? Clyde McCullough? So much of this set doesn't make any sense, they took a lot of time to design it and write up the backs, but then didn't bother getting 3 images right, and a totally random selection of players.

Howie, thanks for posting those articles.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-06-2016, 02:18 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default 1973

1973 may have made sense as a 20th anniversary tribute of some kind. Dave Hornish has speculated the annual Rookie Banquet and they did apparently have one that year, in fact every year starting in 1959 until at least 2004. Not sure after that.

And in a way, Vic Janowicz was better known than McCullough, albeit as a professional football player and former Heisman Trophy winner

And, if it was released even on a limited basis in 1973 it raises a similar question raised by the 1971 Greatest Moments, why not any wrappers, packs or boxes ( I realize a wrapper and box have surfaced for The Greatest Moments, but not enough to indicate a general or even limited retail release to me)

Last edited by ALR-bishop; 09-06-2016 at 03:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-06-2016, 02:53 PM
moeson moeson is offline
Howie Schenker
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 418
Default

My pleasure to post the article/ad. As I had previously mentioned in the other thread, Bill Haber had these cards spread out on his table at the 1973 Spring ASCCA Show in NYC. There were no wrappers and I believe that was likely when these cards were first introduced to the hobby. The Card Collectors Company ads followed shortly thereafter.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-06-2016, 04:48 PM
DBesse27's Avatar
DBesse27 DBesse27 is offline
Dan Be$$e++e
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,157
Default

Newbie question: what are you guys talking about with misidentified players? Are there backs that don't match the fronts or something?
__________________
Actively collecting Carl Yastrzemski !
Also 1964 & 68 Topps Venezuelans
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-06-2016, 04:58 PM
moeson moeson is offline
Howie Schenker
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 418
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DBesse27 View Post
Newbie question: what are you guys talking about with misidentified players? Are there backs that don't match the fronts or something?
The Player named on the front, and discussed on the back, doesn't always match-up with the player depicted. See Post 3 for PSA graded examples.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-06-2016, 06:09 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default

Rosen is really Fridley
McCullough is really Janowicz
Furlllo is really Antonello

It is not unusual to have a wrongly identified player or two in the older Topps base sets, but 3 of 8 must be the record

Last edited by ALR-bishop; 09-06-2016 at 06:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-06-2016, 06:30 PM
Beastmode Beastmode is offline
J@ohn B.ar#ne.s
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tedzan View Post
I am curious as to how rare this set is. It's been reported that TOPPS issued only 300 sets in 1972.

If this is true, then these 8 cards probably rank high as one of the most scarcest post-WWII issues.

I'm wondering how many collectors on this forum have any (or all 8) of them ?

Here is my set of them....


.




Hey guys....show us your cards.


TED Z
.
I think this set is cool. never had any idea it existed until reading this forum a while ago. The color seems to pop and has a sense of artistic expression. Kudos to those that picked these cards up. Very well done.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-06-2016, 06:30 PM
egri's Avatar
egri egri is offline
Sco.tt Mar.cus
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
Rosen is really Fridley
McCullough is really Janowicz
Furlllo is really Antonello

It is not unusual to have a wrongly identified player or two in the older Topps base sets, but 3 of 8 must be the record
What surprises me is those three are correctly identified in the original 1953 set. There was one mistake in the original set (Pete Runnels' card features a portrait of Don Johnson).
__________________
Signed 1953 Topps set: 258/274 (94.16 %)
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-06-2016, 06:42 PM
mrmopar mrmopar is offline
Curt
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 1,145
Default

I have the Furillo/Antonello only. Would have liked to add Jackie and maybe Paige, but never got around to it and now it will cost me dearly.
__________________
Looking for: 1974 TCMA Billy Loes Autograph Card, Unique Steve Garvey items, select Dodgers Postcards & Team Issue photos
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-07-2016, 01:28 AM
Volod Volod is offline
Steve
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NEOH
Posts: 865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by egri View Post
What surprises me is those three are correctly identified in the original 1953 set. There was one mistake in the original set (Pete Runnels' card features a portrait of Don Johnson).
What doesn't surprise me about this mini-puzzle is that Furillo and McCullough were actually not on cards in the 1953 Topps set.
If we are speculating about the reason for the three misidentifications, how about: Topps lined up eight former players to make a public appearance in conjunction with the anniversary of the '53 set's publication, and assigned some flunky to find their cards in the set to use as ad material. That guy finally realized that Furillo and McCullough were not in the set and he could not, for some reason, come up with a Rosen card, so he simply substituted cards of other players in the same uniforms, hoping no one would notice. Slipshod indifference seems like a more plausible cause to me than a bumbling attempt to upgrade.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-07-2016, 06:29 AM
MCoxon MCoxon is offline
Mike
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 223
Default No. of sets, and no. of cards

Right now, the set has a total PSA pop of 294 (across all 8 cards); if there were 300 sets, there would be 2400 total; not sure how that number of cards graded out of a total set run compares to other sets, but given its a scarce issue, my guess is 300 sets might be close.

Interesting populations

1973 Topps Reprints
Paige: pop 45
Robinson: pop 49


1953 Topps set
Paige: pop 2215
Robinson: pop 1743
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-07-2016, 07:29 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default

Steve--- interesting theory. If only 300 were really made that would seem to be more consistent with use at an event than a test release. The event could have been the annual Rookie Banquet and or some kind of 20 year commemoration of the 53 set
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-07-2016, 08:11 AM
moeson moeson is offline
Howie Schenker
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 418
Default

Don't forget that the Card Collector's Company fire likely destroyed some of the 300 sets. Many Topps test sets became much scarcer after that terrible fire.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-07-2016, 08:18 AM
Gmrson Gmrson is offline
Mike Bodner
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Jackson, MI
Posts: 270
Default

I had read in a hobby publication many years ago that a Topps exec made this set up for their sons birthday party...for what that's worth.
__________________
Collecting: 1966 Topps Baseball Set
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-07-2016, 08:36 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default

Mike-- makes as much sense as anything else. They invited 300 kids to the party, gave each a set, and whoever first identified the wrong players won a prize. Or, Woody agreed to make the set for the party but attended a wine tasting party before he did the setup for the set
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-09-2016, 06:06 AM
Volod Volod is offline
Steve
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NEOH
Posts: 865
Default

I guess the knee-slapping possibilities are endless. But, I can easily imagine any Topps exec in 1973 not being familiar with players in the 1953 set, so having to substitute other guys wearing the same uniform could have been the kind of face-saving, last-minute reach that would have made an amusing sitcom episode.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-09-2016, 07:05 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,563
Default

Very true Steve
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:09 AM.


ebay GSB