Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

1998 finest No Protectors?

AndruwHRJones

New member
Aug 9, 2008
1,187
I was looking through my Andruw Jones list today and came accross this. I decided to look it up on Beckett to see what the difference was. Here is Beckett's explanation:

Randomly inserted in retail packs at the rate of one in two and one in every HTA pack, this 275-card set is parallel to the base set only without the Finest Protector covering and features double-sided Finest technology.

So what I gather, retails packs carried cards without the protective covering that you can peel off? Is there something I am missing? This doesn't seem to be a parallel at all. Basically you can just peel off the protective covering and it is now a parallel? Oddly enough, the "No Protector" version is valued at $2 more than the regular version?

If someone could shed some light on this, I would greatly appreciate it.
 

walter55

Member
Aug 7, 2008
786
On the regular finest the back was printed on just regular glossy paper but on the No Peel the back was printed with the same Finest chrome finish like as the front. So the No Peels were dual side Finest while the regulars just had the one sided Finest.
 

sheetskout

New member
Administrator
Aug 10, 2008
5,385
Milwaukee, WI
Yeah! I had a couple boxes of 98' Finest and never really understood that either.

Either way, you'd think the version with the protective coating still in tact would be worth more either way.....

I think this may be the twilight zone.
 

Philip J. Fry

Active member
Aug 9, 2008
5,524
Ohio
As you stated in your original post from Beckett, the no-peel versions had both sides with the chrome technology instead of just the front. Even the refractors have both sides with the refractor technology.
 

n1astrosfn

New member
Dec 4, 2008
372
charlotte
i dont know about ratio per retail/hobby, but the no protectors have a chrome finish on the reverse. therefore the no protectors are also thinner, since its metallically on both sides rather than having a chrome front and paper stock reverse. the no protector refractors ALSO have a refractor finish on the REVERSE. this way you can tell the differences between a real one and a card that has been peeled. it is confusion like this that has put almost NO PREMIUM on the no-protector version over their regular counterparts (ei. refractors with peels sell about the same price as the no-protector).
 

WCTYSON

Active member
Nov 3, 2014
7,167
Just message a moderator to remove the account, instead of spreading the SPAM by quoting the site address.
 

gracecollector

Well-known member
Aug 7, 2008
6,493
Lake in the Hills, IL
Terrible idea by Topps. At least it was a short lived idea. You really can't tell difference from a peeled Protector and a Non-Protector from the front.

Base / No-Protector / Refractor / No-Protector Refractor - I need to scan backs to show real difference.

 

jeffv96masters

Well-known member
Aug 14, 2008
1,394
Terrible idea by Topps. At least it was a short lived idea. You really can't tell difference from a peeled Protector and a Non-Protector from the front.
The no-protector items are darker and look metallic on back but your right from the front its difficult in person and nearly impossible using just a picture. Any regular Finest will have smoother and more shiny surface on both sides.

Left is the regular issue = right is a no protector
While the left is a refractor same thing on a regular base- next to a no protector will always be obvious.

No protectors ALWAYS look darker like the picture is out of focus. Its just that it is actually darker, the finish is dull, and the front more sedated.
My take from busting countless cases of the product.

 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top