Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinD
Seems like a well thought discussion. For instance if Lansford was in the lower right hand position would we have this -
|
That is a very nice find. 52 Large's narrative, which is the one most often cited alongside 1948, is definitely also wrong. I think we will also find in 1952 that the 'short printed' columns are also not as has been claimed. The POP report strongly suggests the short prints are a fantasy.
On the large size Bowman's, the 'internal rows' miscuts all suggest that they are in 32 card sequential sequences, as far as I have seen (with Bowman's 1955 baseball stratagem, possibly used in 1954 too, of replacing blocks of cards with new cards to have a 'living sheet' instead of a Topps style full replacement sheet, we may well find a counter-example, but I have not succeeded in locating such a card). I would love to see a card that does not follow that pattern.
Lansford would likely be above either #117 O'Donohue (representing "series 4"), 81 Kastan (representing "series 3"), #45 Steve Van Buren (representing "series 2"), or #9 Spencer. It is not Kastan, that card has a purple backdrop that does not match the sliver. So this Lansford looks to me like it is probably over another block of "series 1", "series 2" or "series 4".