Author Topic: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library  (Read 128036 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BustedFinger

  • Just a simple collector. No books, no websites, no arguments!
  • Posts: 1422
  • I wonder where this text will appear?
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #350 on: May 15, 2015, 07:26:25 AM »
What stickers were in the pack you opened?  And how was their condition?
Giving "The Hobby" the finger since 1999!

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #351 on: May 15, 2015, 08:07:28 AM »
What stickers were in the pack you opened?  And how was their condition?

Yicks and Lipoff. Knight's move compliant. Opening packs with tan backed series rarely yields anything nice. In this case one was gum stained and the other had a corner ding and roller marks. And the checklist had the wax stain on the bad side.

Offline BustedFinger

  • Just a simple collector. No books, no websites, no arguments!
  • Posts: 1422
  • I wonder where this text will appear?
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #352 on: May 15, 2015, 09:33:19 AM »
Yicks and Lipoff. Knight's move compliant.

So would that be considered a descending knight's move?  I seem to recall a discussion from way back where you had never seen a descending move except in diecut packs.


Giving "The Hobby" the finger since 1999!

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #353 on: May 15, 2015, 10:01:07 AM »
The B side of the sheet has an extra Yicks row on the bottom...



Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #354 on: May 15, 2015, 03:30:50 PM »
So would that be considered a descending knight's move?  I seem to recall a discussion from way back where you had never seen a descending move except in diecut packs.



Incidentally, here is part of a discussion I had on the PSA boards about this topic. The quote is from a very knowledgable collector. He is referring to baseball card sheets here. It doesn't seem to hold true for regular wacky series, but may explain the die cuts.

"A true uncut sheet has 264 cards, it's been my experience that when the cards come from the left half of 132 cards it moves to the left and when they come from the right side the sequence moves to the right."



« Last Edit: May 15, 2015, 03:33:09 PM by Paul_Maul »

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #355 on: May 18, 2015, 09:07:42 AM »
Now on ebay....the ever elusive 3rd blue!!!


Offline bigtomi

  • Posts: 1840
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #356 on: May 18, 2015, 10:36:50 AM »
Now on ebay....the ever elusive 3rd blue!!!
Haven't you been looking far and wide for this one, was uncertain if it existed? Now we know.   LOL

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #357 on: May 18, 2015, 10:42:39 AM »
Hey, PSA may have completely misidentified the pack, but at least the gum isn't poking through the wrapper like so many other PSA 9's I've seen!

I like PSA, but my packs will never go near them.

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #358 on: April 19, 2016, 12:42:51 PM »
Here's a better photo of packs in the plastic spinnerbait tackle boxes.

« Last Edit: April 29, 2018, 03:18:45 PM by Paul_Maul »

Offline ratchet007

  • Posts: 781
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #359 on: April 19, 2016, 12:56:27 PM »
Those look sweet Dave. All appear to be in really pristine condition. I imagine we are looking at a lot of hard work.   :great:

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #360 on: April 19, 2016, 01:15:41 PM »
Those look sweet Dave. All appear to be in really pristine condition. I imagine we are looking at a lot of hard work.   :great:

That is true, but what struck me this morning as I was looking at them is how much the world has changed in 20 years. Had I thought about wackys in 1995, these were all out there waiting. Yet I would have been lucky to find two of them, no less 63 different ones, and wouldn't have even known the first thing about them anyway :)

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 4159
  • http://www.wackypackage.com/
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #361 on: April 19, 2016, 09:04:05 PM »
News flash! Another unopened pack that I was almost certain did not exist has surfaced! In 13 years of paying attention, the only blue 8th series packs that ever turned up were 85-fold with wall poster ad.

Years ago I acquired two 8th blues that had the 85-fold no ad wrapper. Greg did not think this pack existed, and borrowed one of mine to scan it. However, once I became educated, both of these packs were clearly re-sealed fakes, and no other example ever showed itself.

Until last week, when Kruk Cards auctioned the lot shown below. While they were mislabeled as 7ths, the checklist showing said otherwise. I also believed they were real because of the source and the fact that both packs had nearly identical qualities. I was the only bidder. It's great to be the only one who knows/cares about this stuff!

Received them today, and opened the one with the loose flap. Everything 100% legit. Another wacky mystery cleared up!

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)
Nice find!
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!  Visit my website http://www.wackypackage.com/

Offline NationalSpittoon

  • Posts: 1161
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #362 on: July 14, 2016, 12:30:35 PM »
Pack #7: 1973 2nd Series 21-fold pack with ludlow back showing

(Image removed from quote.)  (Image removed from quote.)


This pack originates from a find by Greg Grant around 12 years ago. Pretty cool that not only did a stash of lud packs survive unopened, but the backs were actually showing to prove it! I think there are around 30 of these floating about in the hobby.

I know I'm bringing back another old thread, sorry Bigtomi and Bandaches...  :-X

How can you tell it's a ludlow back? I can't really see anything. Is it easier to see in person, because it's hard to see in the picture. I'm not saying at all that I don't believe you, but I'm curious.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2016, 12:40:45 PM by NationalSpittoon »

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #363 on: July 14, 2016, 02:03:46 PM »
If you look carefully you can see the "snap back" text and the "REMOVABLE" text from the black Ludlow back.

Offline NationalSpittoon

  • Posts: 1161
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #364 on: July 14, 2016, 02:25:14 PM »
If you look carefully you can see the "snap back" text and the "REMOVABLE" text from the black Ludlow back.

Still can't see it, but I'll take your word for it.. I guess I have worse eyes than I thought.

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #365 on: July 14, 2016, 03:00:20 PM »
Still can't see it, but I'll take your word for it.. I guess I have worse eyes than I thought.

The "to remove snap back" line is right next to the pack seal...the V from "removable" is right next to the quacker can.



Offline NationalSpittoon

  • Posts: 1161
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #366 on: July 15, 2016, 03:31:45 AM »
The "to remove snap back" line is right next to the pack seal...the V from "removable" is right next to the quacker can.


(Image removed from quote.)

Oh okay I can see it now. Thanks.

Offline NationalSpittoon

  • Posts: 1161
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #367 on: July 17, 2016, 10:40:19 AM »
Pack #73: 1979 Test Pack

(Image removed from quote.)  (Image removed from quote.)

I've never really had a feel for how rare this pack is. On the one hand, they seem to turn up now and then on ebay. On the other hand, with several collectors going for the singles to complete sets, several seem to get opened as well. So it's anyone's guess how many are still unopened.

I've never seen these sets. Are they just like the normal reissues?

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #368 on: July 17, 2016, 10:57:10 AM »
I've never seen these sets. Are they just like the normal reissues?

They look very much like normal 1st and 2nd series white backs from 1973, only the die cuts are different, usually featuring sharper corners than the originals. Here is the write up:

http://www.wackypacks.com/stickers/testpack/

Offline NationalSpittoon

  • Posts: 1161
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #369 on: July 17, 2016, 03:15:33 PM »
They look very much like normal 1st and 2nd series white backs from 1973, only the die cuts are different, usually featuring sharper corners than the originals. Here is the write up:

http://www.wackypacks.com/stickers/testpack/

Thanks!

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 4159
  • http://www.wackypackage.com/
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #370 on: July 17, 2016, 08:24:16 PM »
They look very much like normal 1st and 2nd series white backs from 1973, only the die cuts are different, usually featuring sharper corners than the originals. Here is the write up:

http://www.wackypacks.com/stickers/testpack/
What is the current theory on the purpose/source of the square cut band-ache that is on my uncut strips from series 1 and that I also found in the wild as a single card and I hear others have also found them. Must have been part of some set....
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!  Visit my website http://www.wackypackage.com/

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #371 on: July 17, 2016, 08:48:32 PM »
What is the current theory on the purpose/source of the square cut band-ache that is on my uncut strips from series 1 and that I also found in the wild as a single card and I hear others have also found them. Must have been part of some set....

Total mystery as far as I know. Some connection to the cloth series die cut?

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 4159
  • http://www.wackypackage.com/
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #372 on: July 17, 2016, 09:39:27 PM »
Total mystery as far as I know. Some connection to the cloth series die cut?
What is the evidence that it is not part of the 1979 set?  I believe there was an uncut sheet sold by Toppsvault that was presented as the 1979 test set sheet but was that pure speculation by ToppsVault guys doing the best they can to figure out what some of the stuff was?
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!  Visit my website http://www.wackypackage.com/

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #373 on: July 18, 2016, 04:43:09 AM »
What is the evidence that it is not part of the 1979 set?  I believe there was an uncut sheet sold by Toppsvault that was presented as the 1979 test set sheet but was that pure speculation by ToppsVault guys doing the best they can to figure out what some of the stuff was?

Based on titles pulled from packs it does seem to correlate with the mail-in poster.

Evidently, some kind of white backed test sheet was produced based on the cloth sheet, with that layout and die cuts. Your strips come from this sheet. I guess there must be different die cuts on many of the titles, do your strips bear this out?

Offline All-Brain

  • Posts: 347
  • All things 79-80 Reissue
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #374 on: July 18, 2016, 06:22:23 PM »
......... but was that pure speculation by ToppsVault guys doing the best they can to figure out what some of the stuff was?

This statement has proven true in my experience with the 79-80 Topps Vault reissue items. For example I recently inquired on a Wormy Packages production photo that was listed as a 1979 reissue piece. The Topps Vault cert verified this. I asked the seller what the dimensions were and he instructed his staff to send me the "dimensions" and instead they sent me the actual item. It turned out to be a good thing because upon closer inspection I realized this was from the Album set and not the 79 reissue set. I promptly mailed it back to him.
There is also a wrapper proof I have that is mislabeled I think. There are other examples but I cant think of them at the moment.

Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #375 on: July 18, 2016, 06:48:37 PM »
This statement has proven true in my experience with the 79-80 Topps Vault reissue items. For example I recently inquired on a Wormy Packages production photo that was listed as a 1979 reissue piece. The Topps Vault cert verified this. I asked the seller what the dimensions were and he instructed his staff to send me the "dimensions" and instead they sent me the actual item. It turned out to be a good thing because upon closer inspection I realized this was from the Album set and not the 79 reissue set. I promptly mailed it back to him.
There is also a wrapper proof I have that is mislabeled I think. There are other examples but I cant think of them at the moment.
A quick glance at the text should of made that obvious to the vault guys. It says 'album stickers' right on it.

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 4159
  • http://www.wackypackage.com/
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #376 on: July 19, 2016, 06:30:55 PM »
Based on titles pulled from packs it does seem to correlate with the mail-in poster.

Evidently, some kind of white backed test sheet was produced based on the cloth sheet, with that layout and die cuts. Your strips come from this sheet. I guess there must be different die cuts on many of the titles, do your strips bear this out?
I am not really sure what you are asking in terms of the strips bearing this out.  All corners are square in my strips, corners are not square on cloth stickers so I don't see the correlation between the two.
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!  Visit my website http://www.wackypackage.com/

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #377 on: July 19, 2016, 08:40:26 PM »
I am not really sure what you are asking in terms of the strips bearing this out.  All corners are square in my strips, corners are not square on cloth stickers so I don't see the correlation between the two.

Ok, then I have no idea where the strips come from. They seem to follow the cloth sheet layout, but if the die cuts don't  match then who knows?

Offline Tom Keen

  • Posts: 185
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #378 on: July 20, 2016, 10:19:36 AM »
Based on titles pulled from packs it does seem to correlate with the mail-in poster.

Evidently, some kind of white backed test sheet was produced based on the cloth sheet, with that layout and die cuts. Your strips come from this sheet. I guess there must be different die cuts on many of the titles, do your strips bear this out?
These infamous strips and the cloth sheet do not share the same configuration. Why are you correlating these square cut cards to cloth series at all?  It seems much more logical they are related to the 1979 test set.  Just because people didn't pull a band-ache doesn't mean it wasn't part of that set.  Does this suggest that all the write-ups, poorman copyrights and websites are theories and that one is no more fool proof than the others?

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #379 on: July 20, 2016, 12:10:22 PM »
These infamous strips and the cloth sheet do not share the same configuration. Why are you correlating these square cut cards to cloth series at all?  It seems much more logical they are related to the 1979 test set.  Just because people didn't pull a band-ache doesn't mean it wasn't part of that set.  Does this suggest that all the write-ups, poorman copyrights and websites are theories and that one is no more fool proof than the others?

I haven't discussed this stuff in ten years and my memory is a bit fuzzy. I see now that the cloth sheet is not configured like the strips, which are configured like the die cut sheet. Still, I don't think the strips are related to the 1979 test. Band-Ache wasn't used in the OPC 1st series or the wall poster, suggesting it was already C&D'd back then. Also, the correspondence between the wall poster and test set is pretty compelling.

Offline Tom Keen

  • Posts: 185
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #380 on: July 20, 2016, 12:19:10 PM »
I haven't discussed this stuff in ten years and my memory is a bit fuzzy. I see now that the cloth sheet is not configured like the strips, which are configured like the die cut sheet. Still, I don't think the strips are related to the 1979 test. Band-Ache wasn't used in the OPC 1st series or the wall poster, suggesting it was already C&D'd back then. Also, the correspondence between the wall poster and test set is pretty compelling.
I made use of the infamous poor many copyrighted educational material that you asked for credit to alleviate any need to rely on memory.  You should print some copies :-)

Compelling hypothesis is cool but this supports my point, it is all speculation and nobody's is iron clad nor better than the other especially when there is hard physical evidence of uncut strips and unexplained loose cards in the wild that don't correlate to even the theories that are considered the "good ones".  There is a very high probability a major piece of information is missing and hence the theories are all equally...theories...

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #381 on: July 20, 2016, 12:34:10 PM »
I have no idea what you're talking about anymore "Tom," but I've forgotten most of what I ever knew about hardcore wacky research. I'm not speaking on this anymore, please refer all questions to Fanatical & Sickly.

Offline Tom Keen

  • Posts: 185
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #382 on: July 20, 2016, 01:02:15 PM »
I have no idea what you're talking about anymore "Tom," but I've forgotten most of what I ever knew about hardcore wacky research. I'm not speaking on this anymore, please refer all questions to Fanatical & Sickly.
The wacky packages reference links(that spurred you to ask for credit of its content) have the picture of the strips and a picture of a cloth sheet and all of the speculation around titles in the test series.  I am just cautioning you and Fanatical to be careful of calling other research as speculation(Rusty's site) and yet you suggest the information in the reference links is something more than speculation when a major piece of the puzzle is unsolved.  I find discussions around this stuff more compelling than discussions around images of the same product being spoofed for the 100th time in ANS wackys or pretty colored borders, chromes and such but that is just me.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2016, 02:33:08 PM by Tom Keen »

Offline Paul_Maul

  • Posts: 2805
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #383 on: July 20, 2016, 02:49:34 PM »
Here's the distinction you're missing "Tom." I have never put a theory out there as fact when there is no evidence whatsoever to support it. My article that you keep referring to is just a collection of observations of changes made in the sheet configurations. Any speculation as to the reasons for those changes is presented as speculation.

Rusty's discussion of the "die cut test set" is written in such a way that someone who didn't know better would think what he's presenting is factual. It is speculation that is not identified as speculation.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2016, 04:48:45 PM by Paul_Maul »

Offline NationalSpittoon

  • Posts: 1161
Re: A WP Unopened Pack Reference Library
« Reply #384 on: July 20, 2016, 02:53:50 PM »
Here's the distinction you're missing "Tom." I have never put a theory out there as fact when there is no evidence whatsoever to support it. My article that you keep referring to is just a collection of observations of changes made in the sheet configurations. Any speculation as to the reasons for those changes is presented as speculation.

Rusty's discussion of the "die cut test set" is written in such a way that someone who didn't know better would think what he's presenting is factual. It is speculation that is not identified as speculation. I really have a hard time believing you can't see the difference.

I see the word "may" used many times in there as speculation, as I'm reading it for the first time now.

 

anything