1995 Bowman's Best Baseball Forum

There are versions of the refactors without the "Refractor" text on the back.  Here are some examples on COMC:

https://www.comc.com/Cards,sh,=1995+Bowman~27s+Best+Red+Refractor+Missing+Refractor,ot,i100

It would be nice for the versions to be added here, but I haven't done the research yet to determine if there is a version for each card.

From Beckett:

The veteran red refractor cards have been seen with or without the word refractor on the back. These cards without the refractor markings are valued at the same price as the regular refractors.

Assuming they aren't considered a printing glitch, I'd recommend adding them as VARs on the existing list and not as a separate insert set.

Is there any reason why they just wouldn't be tracked as it seems they are just wrong-back production errors?

I see, you're suggesting these are "wrong back" errors rather than a printing variation like the junk wax cards with different copyright lines.  I guess that could be argued, I'd be interested in hearing any other opinions on this.

The backs are of the players on the front, they are just missing the refractor label. The same error happened on a chunk of the 1995 Finest refractors as well.

I know it happens, and it even happens in recent sets like one of the UD Allure hockey parallels got the wrong back. The result being "the requisite text is missing" but in a case where the back with missing text is the same as the back from another version, it seems more likely that the wrong back was used, even in those cases where an entire run is like that.

Still a printing glitch. The wrong sheets were loaded at the wrong time in the printing process.

Thanks all - it sounds like the consensus is that these should not be included as variations in the checklist.

I am curious at what point is something considered a legitimate variation or error. This particular error isn't a one or 2 copy error. There aren't millions, but there are a handful of each player in the Red set.

When a plate change has occurred, we have a variation. Simply putting the wrong backs on cards (or sending the wrong cards through the process to have a refractor finish) is not enough. That's a printing glitch that the site does not recognize as a variation. (Personally, not denying the collectibility of such "glitches".)