Any love for vintage bowman? Your thoughts?
 

Hey guys,
What are your thoughts on collecting vintage bowman cards? To Mr it seems like there is not much love in the hobby for collecting vintage bowman cards. Am I missing something here? What are your thoughts on this?

I like them. Have done the 48 to 55 sets with variations. Also did the PCL set.

In general I like the Topps 52, 54 and 55 more. The 53 Topps is very good but the 53 Bomwn Color is hard to beat. See the current gallery thread on it. While the Bowman 51 set beats out any one of the five 51 Topps sets, I think the variety of Topps sets in 51 is pretty neat.

I also did the 48 Topps Hocus Focus baseball subset but while a very interesting concept the 48 Bowmans are heads above

They are absolutely awesome. The cards are stunning, and I share your opinion that they don't seem to get the love of Topps cards from the same era.

1948 was groundbreaking as the first set to reintroduce cards to kids post WWII.

1949 added a bold splash of color and has my single favourite Bowman card (Satchel Paige).

1950 was the first set I built as an adult. Simple, elegant, sturdy, and beautiful, they're wonderful cards. Many people think the Jackie Robinson is his best looking card.

1951 took the formula and expanded the size and scope to new heights. Add in the Mantle and Mays, and it's rightly considered one of the best sets of all time.

1952 may have the best art on any set ever produced. The Mantle is my favourite card from his entire career (and I include the 1952 Topps, which I love).

1953 revolutionized card photography. It is the first set with full color photography, and the image/print quality is stunning.

1954 doesn't get enough love. The Ted Williams is one of the greatest cards ever made. The Mays is one of his best early cards, and I love Mantle's cheeky smile.

1955 is another card that doesn't get the love it deserves. The photos are beautiful, the color is bold, and the TV set borders are simultaneously modern for the day, and a time capsule for the modern collector. Shame about all the umpire cards though.

Spoils to the winner?
 

I suppose the reason for Bowman getting short shrift these days is simply that the company is regarded as having been "defeated" by Topps in 1955. So, in the view of many newer collectors who may see everything in terms of competition, the Bowman sets are relegated to an inferior position to the Topps cards. That, of course, ignores the superior art work and innovative photography that distinguished Bowman's efforts from Topps in the days of their rivalry. The 1951 Bowman set was the first I collected as a kid, and at that time, most candy buyers also thought Bowman's product was more attractive, since it easily outnumbered Topps packs on store shelves.:rolleyes:

I like them all and feel they are underrated. With 1954 being my favorite.

I always kind of looked down on them. I especially thought the 1954's looked washed out. That was until I picked up some that were in near mint shape. I've totally changed my mind. Here's a "low grade" example.

Agree with the OP, and I don't think it's debatable that they take a back seat to the Topps sets from those same years. At least if you look at the prices (which are a reflection of demand) of the cards.

I had a stash of 1954 Bowman and had never really paid much attention to them. Finally decided to pursue the set and I now have a new found reverence for the cards once I put the set together in a binder. They really look good.

I love the artwork on the '51 and '52s (with 52 slightly ahead) and the photography on the '53s is heads and shoulders above anything Topps put out in those years. I like some of the smaller Bowman issues, but always find myself wishing the cards were bigger.

But, shhhhhhh..., don't let it out of the bag how good they are.

I love the later Bowman cards...I've built the 54 and 55 sets. I had a few 55s when I was a kid and they seemed like a piece of history to me...cool TV set cards...loved them. I plan eventually to do the 53's...

However, I do not care much for the smaller cards, the early 50s. I've owned a few through the years, and got rid of them. Cartoonish, too small, look terrible in a binder...just not interested.

I never liked the 1949 or 1955 sets, but the 1950-1954 Bowman sets are my favorite 50s sets along with 1955-1957 Topps. The 1951 set has Mays and Mantle RCs, two of the top post war cards. The 1953 set has the best photography of any 50s set. I think Bowman gets plenty of love.

In general most Bowman issues are under rated. Some great photo's as well. How can you not like this action shot of Pee Wee Reese?

Collecting Bowman sets are a great way for some of the new collectors to get into the hobby and pick up some of the stars for a reasonable cost.

I may not be able to change your mind, but you need the right size of. Under page. The 1950 set in 12 pocket pages looks stunning in a binder.

I also believe that while Topps cards have a wide-based appeal and are collected by the majority of hobby enthusiasts, Bowmans have a selective appeal. When I worked in a baseball card shop and at shows in the 1970s and 1980s, vintage Topps singles sold quickly as there were a number of collectors building sets. Bowmans, on the other hand, had more of an appeal to those collectors who wanted to go to the "next level." They were also a bit more difficult to find as most dealers back then, sold mostly Topps cards.

From my years working full-time at the store (1979-1987), except for one occasion I can remember anyone bringing us a vintage Bowman set or major star cards for us to purchase. The exception was a 1955 Bowman Baseball set in good to very good condition (Mays and Aaron were in really bad shape) for which I paid $20. This was what the seller wanted and I wasn't about to argue. The store owner was pleased, to say the least. The damaged cards were replaced with others in very good to excellent condition and it sold somewhere between $150-$200.

Finally, I remember at the Strongsville show back in 1986, Al Rosen had a "gem mint" complete 1951 Bowman Baseball set for $2,000, which was a stiff asking price at that time. Imagine that set walking into a shop now, even a ratty one would sell for way more than $2,000.

Phil aka Tere1071

Complete 1953 Bowman Color, 1971, 1972, 1974, and 1975 Topps Baseball sets under revision as the budget and wife allows

Under construction:
1970 Topps Baseball - missing over 100 cards, mostly after #450 and the three insert sets

1971 Topps Coins- 107/153

1973 Topps Baseball 659/660, missing #305 Mays

1974 Topps Baseball Washington variations

1952 Bowman is my all time favorite vintage set.

When I got into vintage collecting about six years ago I spent some time researching which set to chase. My criteria was based on artwork, player selection, and affordability. 1952 Bowman checked all those boxes and I completed it over about a three year span. My biggest complaint is that Jackie Robinson was not included....but other than that, it's the perfect, collectible set.

Attachment 551125

Attachment 551126

Attachment 551127

Attachment 551128

Attachment 551129

The Bowman cards from 1950-1955 are some of my very favorite cards in the hobby. I have a complete lower grade set of '52, and I am over halfway toward a set of '50. I also have stars from the other years. I'm away from my scans right now, or I would proudly post some pics! I hope to also build a set of '54 and possibly '53 and '55.

[Delete - double posted]

I think the 55 Bowmans are underrated. They're a more affordable option of owning early-career, mid-grade cards of the post-war great.

p.s. I can't stand the baggy that PSA uses on their oversized cards...

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...69722eb7_b.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...59995fdb_b.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...e8aed6c7_b.jpg

Color TV on cards at a time when probably less than a million folks had a color TV.

Plus all those great umpire cards

Here is a scan of my first two binder sheets of 1950 (that gap is for the Jackie, which I have, but can't bring myself to crack out of the slab). The whole set looks awesome when flipping through the binder.

Attachment 551148

My favorites
 

I have only two Bowman sets I admire and collected.

1. 1953 Bowman Color.
2. 1955 Bowman FB

I believe the Bowman sets from 1950-52 are the most underrated in the hobby. The artwork is unique, and there's nothing quite like it. I'm still trying to figure out how so many images were created — and similar style images were made for three football sets, as well as non-sports sets. Whoever created them deserves credit as a prolific artist. The three sets, which are overshadowed the glorious 1953 Bowman color set, perfectly capture one of baseball's greatest eras.

On the 50 set, completing it with all the no copyright variations is challenging

Two thoughts:

• In true Rodney Dangerfield fashion, the OP did not capitalize 'Bowman' in the title of the thread
• The 1951 and 1955 Bowman Willie Mays cards are the nicest cards of all his playing days issues.

And that's all I have to say about that.

Thanks Sean...I honestly didn't know that existed as I never really looked. Still not a fan of the looks, but seeing that in those full sheets is certainly intriguing. I may have to pick a few up...I've been known to change my tune once I have cards in hand...

My '50 partial is currently in Cardsaver IIs. I will admit those 12 pocket sheets are intriguing.

My favorite Bowman is the 55 set by far. As an oddball project I put them together in lower grade with only purchases/trades with fellow Net54 members. Took me about 2 years and was a lot of fun. I will say I wasn't a fan of the prices the umpire cards sell for.

I'll second that on the umpires, and even a couple of the SP higher number commons. But those umpire cards killed me!

Absolutely love early Bowman cards, especially '51 - '53. The '50s are great too, but I wish they were larger. I think early Bowman are the most attractive cards ever made.

A lot of great cards shown in this thread. Here are a few of my favorites.

Umpires get no respect...
 

Aw, c'mon...Why couldn't a kid in any era admire a guy with this bio? Plus - Big Jim's greatest fame came from TV commercial ads for beer in which he stole scenes from Boog Powell.:rolleyes:

I wish I could find the party to give proper credit, but I did the cardsaver 2s myself before someone here tipped me off about the 12 pocket pages. Trust me, you won’t regret it if you make the switch.

Thanks, man. I like the look. A while back I used binders for everything (some newer sets are still in them) but I switched some to CS2s and boxes. Maybe I was just restless, not sure honestly. The 1950 Bowman never were in a binder, but I might change. I have also thought about moving my '52 Bowman set to the 9 pocket mini pages.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

54 and 55 don't have any of the major RCs of those glorious years -- Aaron, Banks, Kaline, Clemente, Koufax, Killebrew.

The Topps cards are flashier but the Bowman cards are subtle beauties. I have become especially fond of some of the 1950s and 1954s:

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...%20BVG%204.jpg

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...20Minoso_1.jpg
https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...20Doby%201.jpg

How on earth is that Kaline in a 6 holder? PSA has completely forgotten how to grade vintage cards. It wasn't that long ago that this same card would have come back in a 8 or 9 holder.

Here are my favorite Bowmans

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...0578d960_w.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/4839/4...7f2bdd81_w.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...bd702d73_w.jpg

3 very nice cards

Three great cards! That Mantle is one of my favorite cards in the hobby. The surge in value the last couple of years probably means that I won't own one. The same is largely true of Willie. Otherwise, I would build '51, too.

A few of my favorites:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...69735a41_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...3c71e9a1_z.jpg

I used to not care for Bowmans, but a few years ago, there was a large collection of signed ones being broken up that all had trimmed borders, and I decided to go after the Red Sox. When I got them in hand, I was blown away by the artwork, and the trimmed borders made the colors pop. I've since picked up a bunch more; these were just the only two I have available images of right now.

This thread has brought me out of a little funk. I have moved my lower grade '52 set to pages in an Archival Methods binder along with the '50 set I am building. I do, however, have one little problem (it's always something isn't it?). With my '52 set Mantle and Mays are graded. I have been looking for reprints to fill their binder slots, but I can't find any reprints that are original size. The reprints are a little larger. I guess I could trim the reprint down to size and put them in their respective pockets, but I feel like that would look bad. Anyone know of any Mantle and Mays reprints from the '52 Bowman set that are original size?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I went with these. Many cut up cards turned into the Mantle and May's.
:)

The 4 50 Papais

https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...-11_132300.jpg
https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...-11_132426.jpg

One of my favorite Mantles, is his 52 Bowman that I own. Very underrated in my opinion and hell of a lot cheaper than his Topps equivalent!

https://i.imgur.com/zNGy9K7.png

love the 49B set and 50B set. I need to reholder Roy

Great post! I agree with your take on the 50 Robinson and 52 Mantle - especially the Mantle which I also consider his most appealing look on a card. Here are my 2.