Sunday, June 19, 2011

Vintage 'Toons: Redux '64

With no '67, '66, or '65 cards in the lot I purchased, we're going all the way back to 1964.

# of cards: 2
Favorite Card 'Toon: *

I'm giving this one an asterisk because the toons on the backs of these cards are quite different from the others we've seen so far. The cards I got were #494 Al Jackson and #82 Jim Davenport.

Friendly enough looking fellas, but it's the backs of these cards we want to get a glimpse of.
As you can see below, 1964 Topps cards had a not-quite-sctratch-off box at the bottom of the card backs. If you scratched the box with a dime or nickel, it would reveal a cartoon answer to the card's trivia question. Now, I'm not even going to pretend I'm old enough to remember this, but I'm guessing I would not have been able to resist rubbing each and every one of my 1964's with a coin. Evidently, the original owner of the Jackson card had a lot more self-restraint than the owner of the Davenport.

This begs the question that's been bugging me since I got these two: For collectors of 1964 cards, is there a premium placed on unscratched cards versus ones that have been rubbed? Does this cause a huge price discrepancy, especially among the major stars' cards? I'm just curious about this and would like to know if anyone with more experience with this set has an answer.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I've never heard of ANYONE caring one way or another. I know I didn't.