June 4th-5th 2011
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

65 Topps CFL # 57 Sutherin RC

April 24 2008 at 6:36 PM
Rob  (Login billyberu)

Hello,

I know this is probably not the forum but I do not know where else to turn. I have a 1965 Topps CFL 57 Sutherin RC which has 51 printed on the back. Does anyone know if this is an uncorrected or corrected error card. My listing states card as # 57?

Any help or guidance to knowledge would be appreciated.

Rob

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

BobbyBHockey
(Login BobbyBHockey)
moderators

CFL - MLB

April 24 2008, 8:51 PM 

Can't really say anything about the CFL and error cards but the 1965 OPC Baseball 3rd series is plagued with the same thing.

OPC was only as good as the printers they used or the employee's catching error printed sheets...

Bobby

 
 
Craig
(Login socalcraig)

uncorrected error

April 24 2008, 11:51 PM 

According to a football price guide (Tuff Stuff), this was an uncorrected error. Card number 51 has 57 on the back as well. It seems they reversed the card numbers. Hope that helps.

Craig

 
 
Rob Ritchie
(Login billyberu)

65 Topps CFL # 57 Sutherin RC

April 25 2008, 12:21 AM 



Thanks for the response guys!

Craig my # 51 is Garney Henley who is listed as such in my collector's book? Are you saying there is a corrected error out there for # 51? If there was would there not be one for # 57 as well? Just a thought.

Rob

 
 

(Login socalcraig)

65 Topps CFL # 57 Sutherin RC

April 25 2008, 3:33 PM 

Rob-

After looking in the guide again, after Henley's name it says see card #57. It seems that both cards were numbered 51 on the back. Card 51 is correct and there is no mistake with it.

Craig

 
 
Rob
(Login billyberu)

65 Topps CFL # 57 Sutherin RC

April 25 2008, 5:54 PM 

Craig,

My CSC guide lists 51 as Henley and 57 as Sutherin. In my set I have no actual 57 but a 51 Henley and 51 Sutherin with the Sutherin in the 57 spot of the pages?

Who knows!

thxs,Rob

 
 
Current Topic - 65 Topps CFL # 57 Sutherin RC  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index