2021 Topps Heritage Baseball Forum

As mentioned in this thread before, Topps has stated it was not intentional. 

Seems to be an awful lot of them out there then for something "not intentional"

I think in this case they should be cataloged. It's the same 100 cards that have the exact same wrong backs. Hence not random. Easy to catalog. 

i think the fact that some are selling so well on ebay we should list

It's more the fact that there's a lot out there that should get them listed as an exception to the wrongback rule (as 99% of the time they'd either get cought by QC and not packed out or so few would slip by that it couldn't truly be called a error/variation )

I'll go ahead and keep shouting into the void, I reckon. Nothing better to do on a Tuesday morning, really.

These don't get catalogued here. It doesn't matter how easy it is, or how well they're selling on eBay. That's not part of the site's criteria. Once again, I direct anyone who hasn't read it yet to the FAQ. This is literally word-for-word site policy, in print: https://www.tcdb.com/FAQ.cfm?ITEM=WrongBacks

Topps has claimed that they are unintentional - or at least, one customer service rep who may or may not know (forgive my skepticism, but I don't know that someone working the phones at Topps would have this information - as crazy as the hobby is right now, they very well could have hired some people off the street to work the phones, people with no clue about trading cards - but I digress). I would rather see something more along the lines of an official statement about it, but I doubt we'll get that. At this point, actual confirmation from Topps customer service (not an eBay seller or a Redditor or a conspiracy theorist) is the best we've got. Unintentional = not listed here.

So again, the only way these possibly get listed is if Admin grants an exception. But you're going to have to do a lot better than saying that some (not all) blaster boxes contained packs with two wrong-back cards each. That's really not that many in the grand scheme of things, but if you can find evidence to the contrary, pack it up in a message and send it to Admin. Links would be helpful to make your case. 

Outside of that, you can have all of the opinions you want, but that doesn't mean that they get listed on the site.

Maybe Trey Truetel is deemed as more of an authority (and to whom I had looked previously for answers);
https://www.cardboardconnection.com/2021-topps-heritage-baseball-cards

Check out the questions asked about it (toward the bottom of the page) - in 3 spots - and all three spots Trey says it is unintentional. They do not list them in their comprehensive guide to the variations.

So, in adhering to TCDB's rules and guidelines, these wrong backs will NOT be listed here, unless Topps makes an official statement saying that these were an intentional variation - despite anyone's ebay sales and/or desire to have them listed here.

And in case you're looking for yet another hobby voice, Beckett has nothing listed about them on their site either.

Not that it matters one bit, but the more I think about it...the more it seems clear that these weren't intentional and are simply a brutal printing error. There's apparently exactly 100 of these, with fronts and backs reversed - that is, Luis Robert front/Joey Votto back exists, and so does Joey Votto front/Luis Robert back. 

If Topps prints in 100-card sheets (which seems plausible, though I don't know for sure) and they print them with a random assortment of cards (which I would assume they do, to help with collation), then a sheet going through with 100 fronts, and then receiving 100 incorrect backs isn't unrealistic. Same with two, three, four, x number of sheets. 

I would say with a fair amount of confidence that if these numbers are correct (again, I don't know 100% how many cards to a sheet Topps prints these days), Admin probably won't grant an exception. 

Release Note, Trivia or Comment then so that someone not in the know comes along looks for wrongbacks info finds why it isn't listed? As we know not everyone reads the archived forums threads so maybe something there instead. Of course, I wonder how many people read the Comments and Trivia.

Judging on the IRs that come through for the 2017 S1/S2 VARs that were included in Update, requesting that they be added to the S1/S2 set - not enough people read them. And that was put right in the the release notes - the words actually appear on the same screen where these people have scrolled PAST to get to the inacurracy reporting link. Not enough. So it doesn't seem to matter where you put this information, there will be people who don't read it.