1998 Finest No-Protector Refractors

[jgro85]

I have a 98 Finest No-Protector Refractor of Ripken. It doesn't have the protector and it has the "R" by the number on the back, however it doesn't look like a refractor. It just looks like a regular card. I found this in my collection and was like hmmmm. I know I bought it from someone and did not pull it. Did I get ripped off?

I can put up a scan later...was just wondering if anyone had heard anything about these cards.

 

[AndruwHRJones]

A scan would help, but it sounds like you may be talking about a 1998 Finest, Mystery Finest card. If that is the case, this set was full of errors. Cards with R's next to the number that were not refractors and cards that were refractors and without the R. I am personally trying to collect all of the variations for my Jones collection. Anyways, that could explain what you have.

 

[jgro85]

Nah, it's not the Mystery Finest one. It's the regular base set card. I'll try to get a scan up later.

 

[BigAppleJak]

That set is a mess.
There are all kinds of "R" that are not refractors and vice versa.

If the card is radient in appearence then its a Refractor.

 

[jgro85]

So should I just assume it as the regular no-peel then, and swallow my pride? lol

 

[Jastermereel]

My Mariano Rivera's are the same way. The non-refractor is marked "r" and the refractor isn't. I've actually never seen the correct combination together.

 

[011873]

Now that was a dumb ass move by Topps to make a variation without the peel ::facepalm::

Anyway, I dont know what to tell you about the "R", but if it is a no peel, the card back will look Chrome and have etching around the player, like the front does.

 

[brumbach]

I couldn't find a base card to put next to it for comparison but here is the back of a no-protector refractor. It has foil appearance similar to the front of the card. As already mentioned, since they really messed up the Mystery Finest set, they probably also goofed on some the regular set too.

 

[chief7575]

Here's all 4 examples that I have.

regular and refractor versions:

no-protector (back) and no-protector refractor (back is refractor as well)

 

[IndyManning18]

The back should have a refractor look to it too.

 

[mchenrycards]

Most likely it is a pre-production sample as I remember getting samples at my card shop all the time that said they were refractors but they were not. Many of these samples had nothing on it to designate it was a sample. It was almost like Topps did a test run with various backs and fronts and just sent them out as samples

 

[Donutme]

I know I have the same issue too.

Too much difference in the non - peeled cards.

I like the the scans below. It was almost like they have a
Refractor Front / Non Back
Non Front / refractor back

I can tell you this. After this accomplishment Topps had - it led into those SplitScreen/Compliments versions with a refractor on one side and a non refractor on the other !

Here's all 4 examples that I have.

regular and refractor versions:

no-protector (back) and no-protector refractor (back is refractor as well)