20 years wrong. 97 Finest Die Cut Refractor Discussion

[marinocollector]

Welp. Lets just start by saying I was a hater. Now Im looking at it all again, and want to jot down some thoughts and we can all discuss.

Over the years, 1997 Finest Gold Embossed Refractor Die Cuts have had a mythical aura around them due to the set not being numbered like the basketball. That brings us to the dilema. No one know the print run of this popular set in football (or baseball). Due to hoarding, many people think that these are much more limited than basketball (They are not).

Pack odds for all sports in regular packs (1:1152 packs) were the same and the same for jumbo (cant remember the number).

HTA jumbos were allocated at the same rate for all sports (1 case per HTA store)

Basketball was limited to 74 made of each card.

Football from my recollection was more readily available than basketball.

Basketball had a lot more rookie hype at release with Duncan though.

Here's the kicker that I overlooked for years though. The basketball set had 20 cards in each series. Football had 25 in each series.

We can overlook the semantics of jumbo vs hobby vs retail because ratios were practically the same and use just one of the pack odds to calculate the "print run" of basketball.

Same packs as basketball = 60 of each made
25% more packs than basketball = 74 of each made
50% more packs than basketball = 90 of each made
Double the packs of basketball = 120 of each made

This is really eye opening to me. I am sure some leaks have occurred with football that would not be as obvious as basketball (not only the atomics and the newly embossed atomics, but basketball has blank/74 back doored cards) but looking at these numbers has me reevaluating this set for both baseball and football.

So what does your memory feel like this set is at?
Equal to basketball and 74 issued with a handful of leaks?
A little more than basketball but less than 100 total?
Or do you think production overall was the same and because of the bigger set size in football, they are actually more limited?

This should be fun to discuss.

That or no one will say anything.

[TheFrenzy]

Paging JP.

[jplarson]

How did I miss this thread?!

I wish I had more information on the 1997 release, this one and 2001 are the two years I know the least about. But I can offer some background info and speculation.

The 1997 Hobby boxes were 24 packs per box, 6 cards per pack. The Jumbo, or HTA (Home Team Advantage) boxes were 12 packs per box, 13 cards per pack. In 1999 that extra card per pack was an extra SP card (Gems, Sensations, or Rookies). For 1997 it was probably an extra Bronze/Common card. So I agree with your thinking on pack odds essentially being the same (e.g. a Bronze Refractor is 1:12 in Hobby and 1:6 in HTA). I can't speak to Retail offerings, I don't recall Finest being offered in that format (not saying it wasn't, I don't remember).

Topps as far as I know sold Finest boxes 6 to a case. I have a cardboard case (empty) of 1999 Finest that notes CT=6 on the shipping box (case) and an old order form I have for 1996 Topps Finest series 1 also indicates 6 boxes to a case. I think it reasonable to assume 6 boxes to a case for 1997.

Embossed Gold Refractors are 1:1152 or 1 per 8 cases.
Mystery Gold Refractors are 1:1296 or 1 per 9 cases.

I would expect Atomic Refractors to be something like 1 per X cases, where X > 8.

For what it's worth, 72 cases is the first quantity that you can hit all parallels and inserts evenly. There's 9 Embossed Gold Refractors and 8 Mystery Gold Refractors. I would suspect Atomic Refractors would be something dividable from that:

72 cases / # qty of Atomics = # of cases per Atomic Refractor
72 / 8 = 9 or as frequent as Mystery Gold Refractors (unlikely imo)
72 / 7 = fractional number, unlikely but possible depending on how many total cases created.
72 / 6 = 12
72 / 5 = fractional number, unlikely but possible depending on how many total cases created.
72 / 4 = 18
72 / 3 = 24, or 1/3rd the print run as Embossed Gold Refractors (or 3x more rare as EGR)
72 / 2 = 36
72 / 1 = 72, or 1/9th the print run as Embossed Gold Refractors (or 9x more rare as EGR)

*Note - references to Mystery Finest and assumptions on pulling Atomic Refractors are incorrect and based on faulty info gathering on my part.

[SleeperCards]

Originally Posted by jplarson

How did I miss this thread?!

I wish I had more information on the 1997 release, this one and 2001 are the two years I know the least about. But I can offer some background info and speculation.

The 1997 Hobby boxes were 24 packs per box, 6 cards per pack. The Jumbo, or HTA (Home Team Advantage) boxes were 12 packs per box, 13 cards per pack. In 1999 that extra card per pack was an extra SP card (Gems, Sensations, or Rookies). For 1997 it was probably an extra Bronze/Common card. So I agree with your thinking on pack odds essentially being the same (e.g. a Bronze Refractor is 1:12 in Hobby and 1:6 in HTA). I can't speak to Retail offerings, I don't recall Finest being offered in that format (not saying it wasn't, I don't remember).

Topps as far as I know sold Finest boxes 6 to a case. I have a cardboard case (empty) of 1999 Finest that notes CT=6 on the shipping box (case) and an old order form I have for 1996 Topps Finest series 1 also indicates 6 boxes to a case. I think it reasonable to assume 6 boxes to a case for 1997.

Embossed Gold Refractors are 1:1152 or 1 per 8 cases.
Mystery Gold Refractors are 1:1296 or 1 per 9 cases.

I would expect Atomic Refractors to be something like 1 per X cases, where X > 8.

For what it's worth, 72 cases is the first quantity that you can hit all parallels and inserts evenly. There's 9 Embossed Gold Refractors and 8 Mystery Gold Refractors. I would suspect Atomic Refractors would be something dividable from that:

72 cases / # qty of Atomics = # of cases per Atomic Refractor
72 / 8 = 9 or as frequent as Mystery Gold Refractors (unlikely imo)
72 / 7 = fractional number, unlikely but possible depending on how many total cases created.
72 / 6 = 12
72 / 5 = fractional number, unlikely but possible depending on how many total cases created.
72 / 4 = 18
72 / 3 = 24, or 1/3rd the print run as Embossed Gold Refractors (or 3x more rare as EGR)
72 / 2 = 36
72 / 1 = 72, or 1/9th the print run as Embossed Gold Refractors (or 9x more rare as EGR)

Are you saying Atomic refractors were actually inserted into packs? I thought they were backdoored all these years.

[Dallas Cowboys]

For the past few years I have been working on a Master 1997 Cowboys set of the whole year. I haven't gotten to Finest yet. I have purposely put off working on it because it seems so confusing and difficult. I look forward to hearing more from you guys on this thread especially when I start working on it.

[TimBuckTwo]

Can you post pics of what these cards look like?

[cbuskstwar]

I remember my buddy didn't collect cards at all but rode along with me to a show back in 1997 (I was in the Navy, the show was near the sub base in Groton Ct.) He purchased one pack as a joke and pulled the Favre Embossed Gold Refractor. Finest was my favorite product back then, I helped him sell that card for $400 cash and $400 in Griffey stuff.

[marinocollector]

Originally Posted by jplarson

How did I miss this thread?!

I wish I had more information on the 1997 release, this one and 2001 are the two years I know the least about. But I can offer some background info and speculation.

The 1997 Hobby boxes were 24 packs per box, 6 cards per pack. The Jumbo, or HTA (Home Team Advantage) boxes were 12 packs per box, 13 cards per pack. In 1999 that extra card per pack was an extra SP card (Gems, Sensations, or Rookies). For 1997 it was probably an extra Bronze/Common card. So I agree with your thinking on pack odds essentially being the same (e.g. a Bronze Refractor is 1:12 in Hobby and 1:6 in HTA). I can't speak to Retail offerings, I don't recall Finest being offered in that format (not saying it wasn't, I don't remember).

Topps as far as I know sold Finest boxes 6 to a case. I have a cardboard case (empty) of 1999 Finest that notes CT=6 on the shipping box (case) and an old order form I have for 1996 Topps Finest series 1 also indicates 6 boxes to a case. I think it reasonable to assume 6 boxes to a case for 1997.

Embossed Gold Refractors are 1:1152 or 1 per 8 cases.
Mystery Gold Refractors are 1:1296 or 1 per 9 cases.

I would expect Atomic Refractors to be something like 1 per X cases, where X > 8.

For what it's worth, 72 cases is the first quantity that you can hit all parallels and inserts evenly. There's 9 Embossed Gold Refractors and 8 Mystery Gold Refractors. I would suspect Atomic Refractors would be something dividable from that:

72 cases / # qty of Atomics = # of cases per Atomic Refractor
72 / 8 = 9 or as frequent as Mystery Gold Refractors (unlikely imo)
72 / 7 = fractional number, unlikely but possible depending on how many total cases created.
72 / 6 = 12
72 / 5 = fractional number, unlikely but possible depending on how many total cases created.
72 / 4 = 18
72 / 3 = 24, or 1/3rd the print run as Embossed Gold Refractors (or 3x more rare as EGR)
72 / 2 = 36
72 / 1 = 72, or 1/9th the print run as Embossed Gold Refractors (or 9x more rare as EGR)

Why are you being base Topps into this discussion? Mystery refractors were out of topps and have no bearing on Finest print runs.

[marinocollector]

Originally Posted by SleeperCards

Are you saying Atomic refractors were actually inserted into packs? I thought they were backdoored all these years.

I don’t think he knows what he is saying. Atomics we’re not inserted into packs. They were all test issues or sheet cuts.

Also, it takes 200 cases to hit all the embossed gold die cut refractors.

And in topps football, it takes 1296 packs to hit one mystery gold refractor. Which is 36 boxes. Or 3 cases, making it 60 cases to hit the set

[marinocollector]

Originally Posted by Dallas Cowboys

For the past few years I have been working on a Master 1997 Cowboys set of the whole year. I haven't gotten to Finest yet. I have purposely put off working on it because it seems so confusing and difficult. I look forward to hearing more from you guys on this thread especially when I start working on it.

The set is easy. It’s a lot like 1996. With different subsets. The only addition to 1997 is that they have the embossed parallels for silver and gold. The gold embossed parallels are also die cut But it can be summed up like this.

Bronze
Bronze refractor

Silver
Silver refractor
Silver embossed
Silver embossed refractor (has mosaic pattern)

Gold
Gold refractor
Gold embossed die cut
Gold embossed die cut refractor (has atomic pattern)

Test issues/ uncut sheets
Gold atomic refractor
Gold embossed atomic refractor (these were just discovered recently when Leximo cut up embossed silver and gold refractor sheets)

[marinocollector]

Originally Posted by TimBuckTwo

Can you post pics of what these cards look like?

There are 7-8 designs. Here’s one



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jplarson]

Originally Posted by marinocollector

Why are you being base Topps into this discussion? Mystery refractors were out of topps and have no bearing on Finest print runs.

Because I was mistaken sir ! Thank you for the corrections, I've got some updating to do for my master sets.

[SleeperCards]

Originally Posted by marinocollector

I don’t think he knows what he is saying. Atomics we’re not inserted into packs. They were all test issues or sheet cuts.

Cool, I thought I had imagined it or something.

[marinocollector]

Originally Posted by jplarson

Because I was mistaken sir ! Thank you for the corrections, I've got some updating to do for my master sets.

No worries. Down to clown about print run guesses... you just threw me for a loop!

Originally Posted by SleeperCards

Cool, I thought I had imagined it or something.

[88horsepower]

I never did go after the 1997 Finest Atomic Gold Refractor Die Cuts, but I did manage to finish off the "Impact" rookies in both Refractor and Atomic Refractor formats. The Atomic Gold Refractor Die Cuts have always been such a mystery to me.

[TheFrenzy]

They should call it Finer, because I struggle to recognize it as a superlative product.

(Granted, it’s head and shoulders above Poopnini.)

(Also, I fully recognize the 1994 Finest refractors as true path-breakers in the hobby.)

[jplarson]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

They should call it Finer, because I struggle to recognize it as a superlative product.

[jplarson]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

They should call it Finer, because I struggle to recognize it as a superlative product.

It's a double burn cause the gif is identifying you as Boo, then boos you.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by jplarson

Chrome is King and Finer is a member of the court.

( I will say, Finer > Rosen )

[jplarson]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Chrome is King and Finer is a member of the court.

( I will say, Finer > Rosen )

Usurper king at best. Finest is perfection and all other chromium products are mere shadows to its greatness. A sort of echo that is distorted with every reverberation.

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Chrome is King and Finer is a member of the court.

( I will say, Finer > Rosen )

I prefer 1996 Finest to 1996 Topps Chrome set. 1996 Finest had a much broader rookie crop than 1996 Topps Chrome. My only criticism of 1996 Finest is the lack of Eddie George who was in Chrome, and Bowman's Best, but oddly missing from Finest. 1996 Finest had Terrell Owens, Brian Dawkins, Willie Anderson, and Bobby Engram - all great players who weren't in Chrome.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by jplarson

Usurper king at best. Finest is perfection and all other chromium products are mere shadows to its greatness. A sort of echo that is distorted with every reverberation.

I own:

- 1994 Michael Irvin Finest refractor
- a few random 2015 Dorian Beckham Green RC Finest
- I think I had a Dez Bryant and Colt McCoy Finer atomic RC at one pooint

[Wisztradamous]

25% more of 60 is 75 btw.

Great topic!

[TheFrenzy]

Finest is awesome.

[marinocollector]

Originally Posted by Wisztradamous

25% more of 60 is 75 btw.

Great topic!

Yeah. Print runs make it difficult to pin down because Topps could have round up or down to make the numbers perfect. The basketball set has 20 cards numbered to 74. Football has 25% more, with 25 in the set. So if 25% more football was made one would assume 74 to gel perfectly with what basketball was. But it could be 75! No one knows!