1991 Conlon Collection TSN Baseball Forum

An IR alerted me to the fact that there is a variation of every card in this set, and in the case of the first 67 cards, 3 variations.

Here is the text from a blog dedicated t othe research of these issues:

1st printing (Very Rare)
Cards 1-67 were labeled "HALL OF FAME" in the top right front corner. This printing was missing the MLB logo in the upper right corner on the back. Cards 68-330 of the 1st and 2nd printings were identical

2nd Printing (Rare)
The 2nd printing also was missing the MLB logo in the upper right corner on the back from all cards, but the first 67 cards were labeled "HOF(+induction year)" in the top right front corner. This is assumed to be a design change to include the HOF induction year.

3rd Printing (Common)
The 3rd printing (and the most common) finally included the MLB logo on all 330 cards while the first 67 cards were again labeled "HOF(+induction year)" in the top right corner - the same as the 2nd printing.

The question becomes, how to handle these. Here is my proposal. If you like it, give me the mzentko thumbs up. If not, please explain how you would do it differently so we can figure out the best way to do this. Here goes:

• Leave what we have (the 3rd printing) as the base set (just as we do with Topps sets, they are the most common). All of the 3rd printing set will have the MLB logo on the reverse (if there are additional variations with the logo, they will get the VAR - or ERR/COR - treatment).
• Add a parallel set which contains the 1st & 2nd printings (the non-MLB logo cards). Reason behind combining these is because for cards 68-330 there is no difference in the two printings. Additionally, in this set, for cards 1-67, there would be 2 versions, an a version for the first printing, which has "Hall of Fame" in the banner on the front, and the b version for the 2nd printing, which has "HOF - [year]" in the banner on the front. The set total would still say 330, but the list would contain 397 entries (330 + 67).

The only other way of doing this would be to have "First Printing" with the 330 cards, "Second Printing Variation" with just the 67 different ones. This way seems odd that there would be 330, 67, then 330 (base, Third Printing), but than again, just about any method here is going to seem odd.

Let's figure out how to resolve this one together. Thank you.

I personally like the first option where the ERR / COR or VAR is used.  This way when I look to add a card in my collection from this set, all three options are presented together. I can then identify the right one and add it correctly the first time.

Using the second option, it is guaranteed that in no time, we shall have cards added as VAR or ERR/COR in the base set because members are unaware that the VAR are listed in a parallel set. Keep everything together!

 for dan suggestion

I like the parallel setup better

mark

Bruno - I also thought of doing the 3 version for the first 67 cards and 2 versions for the remainder, but we a precedent set in the database for when there is a variation of all cards in a set to create a parallel / another set. (This recently occurred again with the Bowman Art cards with * or ** and I heard directly from Admin to create a second set.) This why I felt the need to recommend adding at least one set.

I understand that. Just wish there was a way of alerting an unknowing member that when he is looking at a set thinking he is in the right place, something BIG, REALLY BIG would make him aware that there may be another version of the same set (without having to check parallels and inserts link).  Parallel sets are usually obvious but when it is an omission like this one in the first two printings, it is not so obvious. Something like a flash pop-up window giving the alert.

YEah, Yeah.....That's what I want a FLASH POPup window when I'm working on my collections. I've already wasted endless hours adding stuff to the wrong collection!! Great idea! ALERT.....ALERT you nummy, you're in the wrong collection. Ha!

My thoughts would be to have it as 1 set with Var for 1st and 2nd printings only because since it probably wasn’t planned on being multiple printings ,where as Topps are purposely printed as parallels and they don’t do multiple printings... this way there should be fewer issues as far as wrong images,etc that would have to be fixed later on...

I would say the Var/Err one.