The ’69 Perranoksi variation that wasn’t and a 1971 milestone of sorts

Ron was a Twin in 1968, though apparently an unphotographed one.

This is a 1969 Ron Perranoski – once of the Dodgers, now of the Twins.  Sharp-eyed observers will note that Ron’s cap still displays a partly-visible “LA.”  Most ’69 Perranoskis do not.  The “LA” is covered with a dark-coloured blob such that even though Ron is clearly wearing a Dodger uniform, it at least doesn’t say “LA” or “Dodgers” anywhere visible. 

I can only presume that Topps noticed the error fairly early on and corrected it with a much darker blob because the cards where you can see the logo fetch a fairly significant premium over the standard-issue Perranoskis. 

This means this is a much pricier variation, at least according to the guides.

There’s one problem, though, that isn’t apparent by looking at the front.

OPC - look in the upper left corner and right margin. Plus, it's really really pink.

This, of course, isn’t Topps.  It’s OPC, and so far as I can tell, they weren’t sticklers for detail because I see no evidence that they ever bothered correcting the cap.  So this isn’t a super-rare variation, it’s a bog-standard common. 

So I got hosed.  I’ll get over it.  At least I didn’t pay eBay prices for this thing.

The main reason I’ll get over it is that they undercharged me a similar amount on a bunch of 1971 OPC high numbers (I think) so I ended up breaking more or less even.

This Mel Queen (future Blue Jays pitching coach) shows the high-number back, which looks exactly like the Topps back.  It hasn’t been modified and it lacks French.  I can only imagine that by late 1971, OPC was well into getting the hockey set ready and realized that completely redoing the card backs was far too much work.  (After 1971-72 hockey was done, I can’t think of an instance where OPC significantly altered the standard card back.  They just squished the text.)  So they’re yellow, but otherwise unchanged.

Mel, though, became the 552nd card in my set, meaning I now have an even 200 to go to finish this thing.  Sadly, 196 of those 200 are the dreaded high numbers, so I haven’t set a timetable for getting it done.  (I’m guessing “never.”  🙂  )