2007 Topps Updates & Highlights 1st Edition

[theplasticman]

Did anyone finish a set of this?

[theplasticman]

Originally Posted by theplasticman

Did anyone finish a set of this?

Are the only differences between these and the base the circular 1st logo on card fronts?

Does anyone have a whole bunch of these singles?

[DaBaddestHic]

I don't have any of these, but I have a few Delgado 1st edition cards, and the only difference is the circular 1st logo.

[theplasticman]

Originally Posted by DaBaddestHic

I don't have any of these, but I have a few Delgado 1st edition cards, and the only difference is the circular 1st logo.

Thanks for the info.

[LWMM]

Here are Gomes's cards from 2007 Topps (Series 2), which I assume are similar to U&H. As DaBaddestHic says, the only difference I see is the circle.

This isn't a set I ever thought of as scarce, but, looking now, I can't find any Gomes available online. COMC lists only 88 of the 330 cards from U&H (27%; link), and only 131/661 of Series 1/2 (20%; link). Baseballcardpedia (Series 1/2; U&H) suggests that they were scarcer than golds /2007: In U&H 1st Editions were 1:36 instead of 1:4 for hobby, for example, and not issued in retail (where golds were 1:4). Just applying the hobby ratio (where 1st Editions were 9 times scarcer), and not accounting for the fact that they weren't issued in retail, and you get something like 223 1st Editions per player (i.e., 2007 divided by 9). That's just a ballpark figure, but it's considerably lower than I would have expected.

End result seems to be a surprisingly scarce card that doesn't seem to be generally recognized as such. And with prices starting at 47 cents on COMC, there's not much of an incentive for people to dig through their commons boxes and pull them out.

Base:


1st Edition:

[theplasticman]

Originally Posted by LWMM

Here are Gomes's cards from 2007 Topps (Series 2), which I assume are similar to U&H. As DaBaddestHic says, the only difference I see is the circle.

This isn't a set I ever thought of as scarce, but, looking now, I can't find any Gomes available online. COMC lists only 88 of the 330 cards from U&H (27%; link), and only 131/661 of Series 1/2 (20%; link). Baseballcardpedia (Series 1/2; U&H) suggests that they were scarcer than golds /2007: In U&H 1st Editions were 1:36 instead of 1:4 for hobby, for example, and not issued in retail (where golds were 1:4). Just applying the hobby ratio (where 1st Editions were 9 times scarcer), and not accounting for the fact that they weren't issued in retail, and you get something like 223 1st Editions per player (i.e., 2007 divided by 9). That's just a ballpark figure, but it's considerably lower than I would have expected.

End result seems to be a surprisingly scarce card that doesn't seem to be generally recognized as such. And with prices starting at 47 cents on COMC, there's not much of an incentive for people to dig through their commons boxes and pull them out.

Base:


1st Edition:

Thanks for the photos. I hope I can track a copy down before long.

[packbusta]

Thank you for the breakdown. Seems to be another example of an unnumbered parallel being looked over. Nothing flashy here.

[base set]

If you’re really bored you can track down the Pepsi edition with the same image on the front but a different card # on the back.

[mikejones]

This reminds me of the frenzy for the jeter, bush, and mantle card. These were going for 250-300 on ebay. Crazy.

[BostonNut]

Squirrel card too!

[jsatx]

Originally Posted by LWMM

This isn't a set I ever thought of as scarce, but, looking now, I can't find any Gomes available online. COMC lists only 88 of the 330 cards from U&H ... suggests that they were scarcer than golds /2007: In U&H 1st Editions were 1:36 instead of 1:4 for hobby, for example, and not issued in retail (where golds were 1:4). Just applying the hobby ratio (where 1st Editions were 9 times scarcer), and not accounting for the fact that they weren't issued in retail, and you get something like 223 1st Editions per player (i.e., 2007 divided by 9). That's just a ballpark figure, but it's considerably lower than I would have expected.

End result seems to be a surprisingly scarce card that doesn't seem to be generally recognized as such. And with prices starting at 47 cents on COMC, there's not much of an incentive for people to dig through their commons boxes and pull them out.

I'm not familiar with this set or how it was packed, but 2004 1st edition was a separate release with ~1600 card print run. So fewer than gold. I think PSA pop reports reflect this and 2004 Yadi 1st edition sell for a premium over gold. I can't say what the print run is here, but I would guess it is lower than gold. That circle (1st) is necessarily something someone would notice when shuffling through cards.

[theplasticman]

Originally Posted by base set

If you’re really bored you can track down the Pepsi edition with the same image on the front but a different card # on the back.

What teams were made for that?

[theplasticman]

Originally Posted by jsatx

I'm not familiar with this set or how it was packed, but 2004 1st edition was a separate release with ~1600 card print run. So fewer than gold. I think PSA pop reports reflect this and 2004 Yadi 1st edition sell for a premium over gold. I can't say what the print run is here, but I would guess it is lower than gold. That circle (1st) is necessarily something someone would notice when shuffling through cards.

We all think around 200-300 per card. I saw an exact count somewhere but don't remember what the number was, but it was between 200-300.

[base set]

Originally Posted by theplasticman

What teams were made for that?

Not made for U&H, but rather a portion of S1+S2:

https://www.tcdb.com/Checklist.cfm/s...07-Topps-Pepsi

Has a few rare printing errors but otherwise just has different card #s. I just stumbled across it recently when someone gave me one of the little 3 card “packs.”

[LWMM]

Originally Posted by jsatx

That circle (1st) is necessarily something someone would notice when shuffling through cards.

There was a thread on FCB recently about "Forgotten Tough Parallels," as part of which I suggested five parameters such cards seem to share:

• Not serial numbered (and no auto/GU, for that matter)
• Inconspicuous variation (easy to overlook)
• Widely sold set (e.g., a Topps or Fleer base set where people might be buying packs at grocery stores—not a set marketed primarily to hobbyists who are more likely to recognize the variations)
• Under-broken set (still in their packs)
• Low dollar value (marginal incentive to seek out the parallels, or even list if found)

The 1st Editions seem to share most of these—all, perhaps, except the fourth (under-broken set). If we assume that there are ~200 of each card (per my rough math in post #5 above), then there are more copies than I would typically think of a tough parallel as having. But numbers alone aren't dispositive, especially in the light of the above parameters. Some Topps parallels released in factory sets are also around /200 (e.g., 2011 red /245, 2013 orange /230, and 2014 orange /199)—and expressly serial numbered as such, which should theoretically make people more likely to list them—yet I rarely see those listed for Gomes.

[theplasticman]

Originally Posted by LWMM

There was a thread on FCB recently about "Forgotten Tough Parallels," as part of which I suggested five parameters such cards seem to share:

• Not serial numbered (and no auto/GU, for that matter)
• Inconspicuous variation (easy to overlook)
• Widely sold set (e.g., a Topps or Fleer base set where people might be buying packs at grocery stores—not a set marketed primarily to hobbyists who are more likely to recognize the variations)
• Under-broken set (still in their packs)
• Low dollar value (marginal incentive to seek out the parallels, or even list if found)

The 1st Editions seem to share most of these—all, perhaps, except the fourth (under-broken set). If we assume that there are ~200 of each card (per my rough math in post #5 above), then there are more copies than I would typically think of a tough parallel as having. But numbers alone aren't dispositive, especially in the light of the above parameters. Some Topps parallels released in factory sets are also around /200 (e.g., 2011 red /245, 2013 orange /230, and 2014 orange /199)—and expressly serial numbered as such, which should theoretically make people more likely to list them—yet I rarely see those listed for Gomes.

Yes! This parallel seems to be right in the sweet spot between being easy to miss and perceived as not worth listing for sale.

[jsatx]

Originally Posted by theplasticman

We all think around 200-300 per card. I saw an exact count somewhere but don't remember what the number was, but it was between 200-300.

Originally Posted by LWMM

There was a thread on FCB recently about "Forgotten Tough Parallels," as part of which I suggested five parameters such cards seem to share:

• Not serial numbered (and no auto/GU, for that matter)
• Inconspicuous variation (easy to overlook)
• Widely sold set (e.g., a Topps or Fleer base set where people might be buying packs at grocery stores—not a set marketed primarily to hobbyists who are more likely to recognize the variations)
• Under-broken set (still in their packs)
• Low dollar value (marginal incentive to seek out the parallels, or even list if found)

The 1st Editions seem to share most of these—all, perhaps, except the fourth (under-broken set). If we assume that there are ~200 of each card (per my rough math in post #5 above), then there are more copies than I would typically think of a tough parallel as having. But numbers alone aren't dispositive, especially in the light of the above parameters. Some Topps parallels released in factory sets are also around /200 (e.g., 2011 red /245, 2013 orange /230, and 2014 orange /199)—and expressly serial numbered as such, which should theoretically make people more likely to list them—yet I rarely see those listed for Gomes.

Nothing wrong with your rough math, but I'm thinking it is closer to 100. Baseballcardpedia shows copper and printing plates are both hta exclusive. Copper is 1:4 packs X numbered to 56 X 330. Plates are 1:54 packs X 4 X 330. This is about 73,000 packs of HTA or 7,300 boxes. Using chrome rookies at 1/box in hobby and hta and what we know about the # of HTA boxes, we get 15,525 boxes of hobby and ~560k packs.

So HTA 1st odds of 1:5 packs X 73k packs = 14,600
Hobby 1st odds of 1:36 packs X 560k packs = 15,525
~30k cards / 330 players = ~90 cards per player.

I love what LWMM said about un-numbered, not valuable, and inconspicuous. Given those variables, and the low print run, and this will be a very difficult set to put together almost 20 years after release.

[LWMM]

Originally Posted by jsatx

Nothing wrong with your rough math, but I'm thinking it is closer to 100. Baseballcardpedia shows copper and printing plates are both hta exclusive. Copper is 1:4 packs X numbered to 56 X 330. Plates are 1:54 packs X 4 X 330. This is about 73,000 packs of HTA or 7,300 boxes. Using chrome rookies at 1/box in hobby and hta and what we know about the # of HTA boxes, we get 15,525 boxes of hobby and ~560k packs.

So HTA 1st odds of 1:5 packs X 73k packs = 14,600
Hobby 1st odds of 1:36 packs X 560k packs = 15,525
~30k cards / 330 players = ~90 cards per player.

Your math looks better than mine. I've checked again as per the below, which largely duplicates your calculations; this leads to a range of 90 to 94 copies of each card for U&H. Since this is all back-of-the-envelope and odds aren't overly precise to begin with, I would mentally round up to ~100 for each.

Approximate HTA packs:

• 18,480 copper cards (330*56) * 4 (per 1:4 HTA odds) = 73,920
• 1,320 printing plates (330*4) * 54 (per 1:54 HTA odds) = 71,280

Approximate hobby packs:

• 22,825 chrome rookies (330*415) at 1:10 HTA means that either 7,392 or 7,128 were in HTA (using above numbers of HTA packs), leaving 15,433 or 15,697 for hobby. With 1:36 hobby odds, that means either 555,588 or 565,092 hobby packs.
• 250 All-Star Stitches Dual (10*25; same with the Triple parallel) at 1:490 HTA means that either 151 or 145 were in HTA (using above numbers of HTA packs), leaving 99 or 105 for hobby. With 1:5600 hobby odds, that means either 555,200 or 585,371 hobby packs.

Approximate 1st Editions:

• HTA: Using the low number of HTA packs, at 1:5 odds, means 43 of each card (71,280/5/330). Using the high number means 45 of each card (73,920/5/330).
• Hobby: Using the low number of hobby packs, at 1:36 odds, means 47 of each card (555,200/36/330). Using the high number means 49 of each card (585,371/36/330).
• Combining the low/high numbers from HTA/hobby means 90 or 94.

Meanwhile, for Series 1, there were some 129,360 HTA packs based on odds for copper (1:7) and printing plates (1:98), suggesting 78.4 of each 1st Edition card (129,360/5/330). There were also 399 In The Name 1/1s at 1:488 HTA and 1:8292 hobby, which suggests 1,110,448 hobby packs and thus 93.5 of each 1st Edition card (1,110,448/36/330). Adding these up leads to 172 of each 1st Edition.

For Series 2, it's again possible to calculate the approximate number of HTA packs (using the 1:10 copper odds, 330*56*10 = 184,800; alternatively, using the 1:139 printing plate odds, 1,320*139 = 183,480). This (given the 1:5 odds) suggests 111 or 112 copies of each 1st Edition released in HTA (183,480/330/5, or 184,800/330/5). Calculating the number of hobby packs is more difficult, however, because the remaining serial-numbered cards have (partially) uncertain odds, and/or have odds given for both hobby and retail.

[corockies]

Originally Posted by LWMM

Your math looks better than mine. I've checked again as per the below, which largely duplicates your calculations; this leads to a range of 90 to 94 copies of each card for U&H. Since this is all back-of-the-envelope and odds aren't overly precise to begin with, I would mentally round up to ~100 for each.

Approximate HTA packs:

• 18,480 copper cards (330*56) * 4 (per 1:4 HTA odds) = 73,920
• 1,320 printing plates (330*4) * 54 (per 1:54 HTA odds) = 71,280

Approximate hobby packs:

• 22,825 chrome rookies (330*415) at 1:10 HTA means that either 7,392 or 7,128 were in HTA (using above numbers of HTA packs), leaving 15,433 or 15,697 for hobby. With 1:36 hobby odds, that means either 555,588 or 565,092 hobby packs.
• 250 All-Star Stitches Dual (10*25; same with the Triple parallel) at 1:490 HTA means that either 151 or 145 were in HTA (using above numbers of HTA packs), leaving 99 or 105 for hobby. With 1:5600 hobby odds, that means either 555,200 or 585,371 hobby packs.

Approximate 1st Editions:

• HTA: Using the low number of HTA packs, at 1:5 odds, means 43 of each card (71,280/5/330). Using the high number means 45 of each card (73,920/5/330).
• Hobby: Using the low number of hobby packs, at 1:36 odds, means 47 of each card (555,200/36/330). Using the high number means 49 of each card (585,371/36/330).
• Combining the low/high numbers from HTA/hobby means 90 or 94.

Meanwhile, for Series 1, there were some 129,360 HTA packs based on odds for copper (1:7) and printing plates (1:98), suggesting 78.4 of each 1st Edition card (129,360/5/330). There were also 399 In The Name 1/1s at 1:488 HTA and 1:8292 hobby, which suggests 1,110,448 hobby packs and thus 93.5 of each 1st Edition card (1,110,448/36/330). Adding these up leads to 172 of each 1st Edition.

For Series 2, it's again possible to calculate the approximate number of HTA packs (using the 1:10 copper odds, 330*56*10 = 184,800; alternatively, using the 1:139 printing plate odds, 1,320*139 = 183,480). This (given the 1:5 odds) suggests 111 or 112 copies of each 1st Edition released in HTA (183,480/330/5, or 184,800/330/5). Calculating the number of hobby packs is more difficult, however, because the remaining serial-numbered cards have (partially) uncertain odds, and/or have odds given for both hobby and retail.

If we didn't have player collectors like you, the collecting community overall would lose so much knowledge to time. So much of this information is stellar and wouldn't even exist if people like you weren't out there grinding the data for a player collection. I offer you my sincere thanks for doing what you do.

I've relied on your Gomes collection, theplasticman's Erstad collection, Brad's Mark Grace collection, and Tom Kraft's Cleveland Indians collection (plus my own Rockies team collection) for the most comprehensive information available out there.

[LWMM]

Originally Posted by corockies

If we didn't have player collectors like you, the collecting community overall would lose so much knowledge to time. So much of this information is stellar and wouldn't even exist if people like you weren't out there grinding the data for a player collection. I offer you my sincere thanks for doing what you do.

I've relied on your Gomes collection, theplasticman's Erstad collection, Brad's Mark Grace collection, and Tom Kraft's Cleveland Indians collection (plus my own Rockies team collection) for the most comprehensive information available out there.

Hah, thanks! Those are some of the main collections I rely on too. I don't want to know the amount of time that I've spent, as you say, grinding the data, just to divine a few minor insights about an issue. But it's fun, and, every so often, it results in a discovery that's actually helpful—such as finally being able to remove the 2004 Skybox LE Artist Proof from my checklist (link). Having Baseballcardpedia and TCDB, both of which consolidate much information related to inserts/parallels/odds that might otherwise be lost, is a huge help also.

[theplasticman]

Originally Posted by corockies

If we didn't have player collectors like you, the collecting community overall would lose so much knowledge to time. So much of this information is stellar and wouldn't even exist if people like you weren't out there grinding the data for a player collection. I offer you my sincere thanks for doing what you do.

I've relied on your Gomes collection, theplasticman's Erstad collection, Brad's Mark Grace collection, and Tom Kraft's Cleveland Indians collection (plus my own Rockies team collection) for the most comprehensive information available out there.

Thanks for the kind words. I love this stuff!

[theplasticman]

Originally Posted by LWMM

Hah, thanks! Those are some of the main collections I rely on too. I don't want to know the amount of time that I've spent, as you say, grinding the data, just to divine a few minor insights about an issue. But it's fun, and, every so often, it results in a discovery that's actually helpful—such as finally being able to remove the 2004 Skybox LE Artist Proof from my checklist (link). Having Baseballcardpedia and TCDB, both of which consolidate much information related to inserts/parallels/odds that might otherwise be lost, is a huge help also.

Agreed!

I am looking for the 2004 Skybox LE Artist Proof. I have never seen an Erstad, and I am unsure how I missed that thread on FCB.