2023 Panini Prizm Racing Forum

It appears that very large numbers of the base level inserts were misprinted with the word "Prizm" on the back.  I know we don't normally list printing errors on this site, but it seems like this is a very significant number, as I am seeing around 1/3 to 1/2 of the base cards from multiple sources with the incorrect back (Prizm back, Base front).  All cards that I have looked for I have been able to find both versions, so it doesn't seem to have only impacted certain cards.  It does only seem to be insert cards, not the base set.  I have not yet seen any Prizm cards with regular base backs.

So, should a variation be added for base inserts with Prizm backs?  Interested to hear others opinions on this.  Is this a widespread enough mistake to warrant it?  

I'd tend to agree. I mean, there are variations for a single extra period in other sets. This seems like a significant deal. And there is precedence in racing with the 2005 Press Pass Platinum set. I didn't notice this issue until I stumbled on this thread. In my pile of base inserts:

Pot of Gold - 1 card - nothing on back

Widescreen - 2 cards - nothing

Fractal - 4 cards - nothing

Prizmatic - 3 cards - all say "Prizm" on back

National Pride - 3 cards - 2 say "Prizm" on back, 1 does not

Victory Lane -  2 cards - nothing

Kaleidosecopic - all say "Prizm" on back

For me, only the National Pride cards have a difference, and I believe it's because I got one in a break, whereas most of the others all came from the same hobby box.

It's not a variation unless there is a separate distinct version of the card which has / or is missing whatever detail , or is a distinctly different image is being talked about.

Is that the case here ? Are there individual cards that are printed both with and without the 'Prizm' text.

If not, then surely an UER note is applicable not a Var.

I checked my cards against the scans uploaded to the site, and yes, my cards have slightly different backs. Seems they are true variants.

I have the same card in hand with both backs for numerous examples..  Normally I would say it is a one off printing error, but there seems to be a ton of these base insert cards out there with the wrong (Prizm) back.

Prevalence does not justify listing.

The 1996 Fleer misfoiling debacle was listed, and Admin removed them when it was brought to his attention.

This appears to be a WRONG BACK issue where they put the Prizm backs on base cards (and/or vice-versa?). If you think they should be added, check with Admin, but my instinct says they don't meet the eligibility requirement.

Has happened in both baseball and football several times in recent years. Seems the question is are they variations or wrong backs? I tend to see them as wrong backs (although on a somewhat large scale)

Also remember the Topps Heritage release that had several wrong backs (and were quite prevalent). Admin advised us to not list them when I asked.

I'd say these are wrong backs on a very large scale. I added a note to the main set and the individual insert sets that were impacted by this issue. Have not seen any of the "Prizm" cards with a base back (yet) just lots of base cards with Prizm backs. It is a bit of an unusual wrong back though since the subject matter matches the front, the only difference is the word "PRIZM" being on the back when it shouldn't be.

Here's what I have, keeping in mind that when buying I was deliberately trying to get cards with the correct back (no prizm)-

Fractal- 7 Prizm, 9 no prizm (have both versions for 1 card)

Kaleidoscopic- 7 Prizm, 13 no prizm

National Pride- 7 Prizm, 9 no prizm (have both versions for 1 card)

Pot of Gold- 5 Prizm, 5 no prizm

Prizmatic- 7 Prizm, 8 no prizm

Victiry Lane Bound- 5 Prizm, 11 no prizm (have both versions for 1 card)

Widescreen- 3 Prizm, 7 no prizm (have both versions for 1 card)

My Prizm back count definitely would have been higher if I hadn't started to avoid them. These were coming from a number of different sellers, so it is highly unlikely it was an isolated bad batch.