2011 Topps Heritage Variations and SP's Announced

[mudflap02]

http://www.beckett.com/news/2011/03/top ... ariations/

 

[mudflap02]

Re: Heritage confirmation SP from Topps

The green tint info is incorrect - I pulled one from a rack pack.

 

[Piratesfan1418]

Yay! Now onto the building!

 

[Bob Loblaw]

Re: Heritage confirmation SP from Topps

The green tint info is incorrect - I pulled one from a rack pack.

Then Topps LIED.

No card company has EVER done that.

 

[AMAZIN HOF COLLECTOR]

Re: Heritage confirmation SP from Topps

Thanks for the info.
Heritage always confuses the hell out of me!

 

[mudflap02]

Re: Heritage confirmation SP from Topps

Thanks for the info.
Heritage always confuses the hell out of me!

Jeff N. reported for thank poaching.

 

[schmidtfan20]

Re: Heritage confirmation SP from Topps

The green tint info is incorrect - I pulled one from a rack pack.

Then Topps LIED.

No card company has EVER done that.

like topps is getting this info from their guys, please, this info is weeks old. Topps doesn't know what is in their
boxes. I would trust the guy who opened 26 cases over topps any day.

Kevin

 

[Bob Loblaw]

Re: Heritage confirmation SP from Topps

Thanks for the info.
Heritage always confuses the hell out of me!

Jeff N. reported for thank poaching.

huh?

 

[Pine Tar]

http://www.beckett.com/news/2011/03/topps-confirms-2011-heritage-baseball-sps-and-variations/

Topps confirms 2011 Heritage Baseball SPs and variations

By Chris Olds | Editor

Collectors have been examining their 2011 Topps Heritage baseball cards closely since their arrival earlier this month, discovering variations and nods to the past here and there.

But on Thursday Topps made all the guessing games end as it confirmed a group of variations in the set.

The short-printed base cards are Nos. 426-500, while card Nos. 110-158 and 160-196 have green-tinted cards, while there are blue-tinted versions in Walmart loose packs and red-tint cards found in Target loose packs.

Six short-printed variations in the set include:

– Alex Rodriguez (reversed negative), a card that has sold for as much as $300.

– David Wright (Cincinnati Reds listed on front)

– Joba Chamberlain (appears on a version of card No. 139)

– Bengie Molina (Wrong birthday on back)

– Ryan Zimmerman (batting average incorrect on back)

– Vladimir Guerrero (listed as a pitcher on the back)

Topps also confirmed that Green Refractor Hot Boxes are found one per hobby case.

Ok I bought one blaster from Walmart and 6 loose packs and I can not tell the difference on any of the cards.
If Ryan Zimmerman is a Short print here with a wrong batting average on back, I have 2 of these one from the blaster and the other was from a loose pack.

As for these
The short-printed base cards are Nos. 426-500, while card Nos. 110-158 and 160-196 have green-tinted cards, while there are blue-tinted versions in Walmart loose packs and red-tint cards found in Target loose packs.

Are the numbers the same in the Wal-mart loose packs for the blue tints? because I have 15 of these in those 2 groups of numbers, and I can't see anything different about them as well. One of the cards is Babe Ruth twilight special #141
Here is what I got of of my loose packs that seem to fall the range of these listed above
Cards 110-158
#117 Alex Rio
#118 Ski Schumaker
#120 Bronson Arroyo
#121 Buck Showalter
#127 Pride of the A's Dallas Braden Trevor Cahill
#132 Angels 2010
#141 Babe Ruth Special Twilight Years
#155 Brian Wilson....hair is spiked up an no beard
#157 Shane Victorino
#158 Atlanta Braves 2010

Cards #160-196
#161 Bobby Jenks
#168 Raji Davis
#169 Curtis Granderson
#170 Aramis Ramirez
#177 J.A. Happ
#177 Jim Thome
#184 Kurt Suzuki

Richard

 

[brouthercard]

Thanks, Topps, for making 2011 Heritage one of the most paranoia-inducing breaks in the history of mankind.

 

[TNP777]

Six short-printed variations in the set include:
– #490 Alex Rodriguez (reversed negative), a card that has sold for as much as $300.
– #478 David Wright (Cincinnati Reds listed on front)
– #139 Joba Chamberlain (appears on a version of card No. 139)
– #279 Bengie Molina (Wrong birthday on back)
– #392 Ryan Zimmerman (bbatting average incorrect on back)
– #125 Vladimir Guerrero (listed as a pitcher on the back)

nice to see my speculation has been confirmed as fact by Topps, although the original #279 had a word discrepancy rather than a birthdate error. I agree with others that Topps either doesn't know or seems to not know what the heck is in their own product. It's frustrating beyond belief to not have them post this sooner than this. Every year it's the same, though - why should we expect any different?

Even though it has lipstick on, I'd recognize that pig anywhere.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

I agree with others that Topps either doesn't know or seems to not know what the heck is in their own product. It's frustrating beyond belief to not have them post this sooner than this. Every year it's the same, though - why should be expect any different?

Even though it has lipstick on, I'd recognize that pig anywhere.

Its great Topps doesn't know these little details, or claims not to know... its seemingly been that way since 1951. There's no reason why a corporation would want to make themselves overly accountable for such small details over such a simple product...or else hobbyists who are too serious would start demanding even more accountability, making a simple product less so...and probably thereby making the product less interesting & collectible at the same time

Its also funny in a way when people who buy their - again, admittedly very simple - product are more serious about it then the people who produce it. It shows Topps is more oriented to general, simple collecting and that there are still plenty of nerds out there hooked on the status quo.

 

[Pine Tar]

Sorry for the mistake it seems Ryan Zimmerman may have 2 cards in this set since the ones I have
or #95and have the correct batting average on the back I do not think I have any #392 cards.
And as I look at the cards again, why is Baseball on the back which is the card number, some of them have a small ball and some are larger. Man this card set is really confusing to understand.

 

[rico08]

Those are far less exciting than they could have been. I would have liked to have seen Topps stay true to the variants in the original 62 set.

 

[TomMurry]

This is exactly why I dont do Heritage. A SP because they list a birthday or AVG wrong? Seriously? **** with that nonsense. At least Topps Sparkles dont require intimate knowledge of every aspect of a players being.

Jeez, just make f'ing cards and get on with it, or would that be too much to ask?

 

[aupt]

No wonder nobody collects new sets anymore.

 

[stalegum]

A few comments:

Cards #139 (Joba), #279 (Molina), #478 (Wright), and #490 (A-Rod) are based on actual error cards in the 1962 set.

In the original set, Hal Reniff (card #159) mistakenly appears on two different cards numbered 139. One features the same picture as #159, the other with a completely different photo. For 2011 Heritage, Joba Chamberlain also appears on two different card #139s: one using the same photo as card #159, and the other with a different photo. Like the Reniff "139s," the Chamberlain "139s" were unannounced short-prints.

In the '62 set, Hobie Landrith's card (#279) lists an incorrect birthdate.

In the '62 Topps set, Don Zimmer (#478) was listed as a Cincinnati Red, despite being depicted as a New York Met. Zimmer began the season with the Mets, but a month into the season was traded to Cincinnati. Topps was unable to find a picture of Zimmer as a Red, so they used a current-year photo of him as a Met.

Clete Boyer's '62 Topps card (#490) was a reverse negative -- depicting him batting left-handed, when in fact, he was a righty.

In the case of the Landrith, Zimmer, and Boyer cards, all three errors were uncorrected. Unfortunately for 2011 Heritage, Topps decided to turn all three into gimmicked errors. So much for staying true to the original set.

As for the just announced Zimmerman and Guerrero gimmicks (#95 and #125, respectively), I could not find any error (corrected or otherwise) or variation on either Don Hoak's (#95) '62 Topps card, nor could I find the back of either one of Gene Woodling's card (#125), regular or Green Tint, listing him as a pitcher. Topps literally cooked up a couple of new gimmick cards just for the hell of it.

What made Topps Heritage such a special set, was that Topps stayed true to the original. Sadly, this is now no longer the case.

 

[ThoseBackPages]

will this uproar about Heritage mean everyone will hate it now? (and i can finally start collecting them)

 

[ChasHawk]

I agree with others that Topps either doesn't know or seems to not know what the heck is in their own product. It's frustrating beyond belief to not have them post this sooner than this. Every year it's the same, though - why should be expect any different?

Even though it has lipstick on, I'd recognize that pig anywhere.

Its great Topps doesn't know these little details, or claims not to know... its seemingly been that way since 1951. There's no reason why a corporation would want to make themselves overly accountable for such small details over such a simple product...or else hobbyists who are too serious would start demanding even more accountability, making a simple product less so...and probably thereby making the product less interesting & collectible at the same time

Its also funny in a way when people who buy their - again, admittedly very simple - product are more serious about it then the people who produce it. It shows Topps is more oriented to general, simple collecting and that there are still plenty of nerds out there hooked on the status quo.

topps is oriented toward making money...period

 

[gt2590]

I love it that our site is more exact and accurate than Topps'. :lol:

Has anyone figured out, or tried to figure out, how often these indidivual SSPs show up?