Who was around for Bowman Vs Topps?

[theseeker]

When I was a kid, Topps was the only game in town. Would love to hear stories about what it was like as a kid when both Bowman and Topps were available.

Which company was more popular? Who sold more cards? Did most collectors choose one over the other, or collect both? Did candy stores typically stock both or carry only one brand? Was one brand more readily available? Where there regional differences in terms of popularity and availability?

[dougscats]

I really started collecting as the Bowmans died out. But I had my brother's cards and played with them.
The Bowmans had two major flaws:

The Bowmans/card size [there are slight but perhaps crucial differences] were made of flimsier cardboard, and they easily bent in the middle. As kids played more with the cards in those days, this was a serious and chronic ['53-55] short-coming.

The console-TV border on the '55 Bowman was an artistic disaster of Edsel proportions.

That being said, the '51-52 Bowmans are one of my favorites, and the '53's are generally admired for their photography and spectacular color.

Ironically, after Topps won, they down-sized their cards, which became the standard size for more than 50 years now. I like the bigger cards myself.

That's what I remember.

Doug

[Volod]

Started with the 1951 issues, as a seven-year-old in an upstate NY town. My father was an avid bowler and took my brother and me with him to the alleys on Friday nights, giving us a buck each to amuse ourselves for several hours. Rather than hang out in the smokey, beer drenched lanes - yep, authorities unconcerned in those days - bro and I spent hours in the dark little mom&pop store next door. There, we mostly pored over comics, but the proprietor had what seemed like mountains of '51 Topps Redback panels and CMAS cards selling for two cents a pack with the stick of nasty caramel. For some reason, he had no Bowman product - maybe a Topps rep talked him into taking an order and he had trouble getting rid of the cards, so he passed on the Bowmans. Did not discover Bowman until the next spring when it seemed like every kid in the schoolyard had thick stacks of '51's and 52's for trade. Significantly, the only '52 Topps cards I can recall seeing were cut-down to match the smaller Bowman, so that the stack would be uniform. Intrigued by those few oddities, I spent that summer searching for Topps in local outlets, which all carried plenty of Bowman, but with no success. I have to think now that Topps may have had difficulty moving its initial offerings upstate and did not make a strong push there until 1953. That year, the competition really picked up, and I bought many packs of both company's product. The '53 Bowman were definitely more attractive and strongly preferred among my peers, although I think the '53 Topps were more plentiful in stores and their gum may have been better. As a Braves fan, I scoured stores that summer trying to find more '53 Bowmans, since I had only commons and never did unwrap a Spahn or Matthews - until some 30 years later. I think the '53 Bowmans for the most part disappeared from store counters in my town by mid-summer, prefiguring the downturn to come. And, by the next year, 1954, the Bowmans were much harder to find, while it seemed Topps was everywhere. Just my recollection from a limited perspective - I'm sure conditions may have been different in other areas, especially in the large cities.

[GasHouseGang]

Steve, I know what the redbacks are but what are CMAS cards with caramel?

[Brianruns10]

Originally Posted by dougscats

The console-TV border on the '55 Bowman was an artistic disaster of Edsel proportions.

Doug

Funny you mention that. When we talks cards, my dad always laments what happened to what he called his "TV cards" He saved all his sets 57-63, but the 55 Bowman's didn't make it for some reason, and if he did collect the 56 Topps, those were lost too.

[theseeker]

Volod's recollections gave me a Rockwell moment just imagining....a precocious, 8 year old Volod in late summer 1952.....
Volod's Dad, "for the last time, no, I will not take you up to Canada in order for you to buy baseball cards."
"But Dad," Volod insists "I can't get those Topps high numbers around here. I tell ya, they'll be worth a fortune one day."

[theseeker]

And yes...I can well image those TV console Bowmans didn't go over too big with kids, especially when compared with the '55 Topps. Yet, in the present moment, I find them to have a real nostolgic appeal. Pocess a sort of hokey charm. I lump 'em in with the '68 burlap Topps, which I also seem to like more than most collectors. I also find Rottweilers adorable.

[Samsdaddy]

Originally Posted by theseeker

And yes...I can well image those TV console Bowmans didn't go over too big with kids, especially when compared with the '55 Topps. Yet, in the present moment, I find them to have a real nostolgic appeal. Pocess a sort of hokey charm. I lump 'em in with the '68 burlap Topps, which I also seem to like more than most collectors. I also find Rottweilers adorable.

I remember an early issue of Baseball Cards magazine had a feature on the 1955 Bowman set by Bob Lemke who often appears in these forums. He was/is a big fan.

I don't mind that set but I CANNOT get into that 1968 burlap set to save my life. I have only a couple cards from that set of my favorite players and that is it.

[Volod]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

Steve, I know what the redbacks are but what are CMAS cards with caramel?

CMAS = Connie Mack All Stars. Topps packaged, if memory serves, one CMAS card with two panels of redbacks, along with a bar of caramel candy wrapped in a pack that usually sold for a nickel. In a number of different press runs, team cards were also included - Dave Hornish has an excellent and highly detailed survey of these issues and their packaging at his blog: http://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/se...seball%20Candy
Recalling those caramel bars, I feel lucky to still have my teeth.

[ALR-bishop]

I have the 5 Topps 1951 sets ( minus the unissued 3 CAS :-))and one of the unopened packs shown in the blog that has a full 2 panel set of Red Backs, a game board and 4 either CASs or CMASs...can't tell which since they are sandwhiched among the red back panels. Unfortunately the two stacks of panels are bound together at the perforations with two small rubber bands. The rubber bands have probably not taken a great toll on the panels given their location, but over6 0 years have surely caused the ASs some pain

[Volod]

Al - You are describing the cello-pack, right? I have a '51 Topps 5-cent wrapper that held - if my recall is correct - two redback panels with one AS card between. It's as if Topps was actually using the more plentiful redbacks to buffer the delicate AS card against the noxious candy bar, and it was in fact claimed by Sy Berger that the ink used on the cards did interact with the candy to some extent.
Dave hypothesizes that, in the original press runs, the redbacks were always packaged with CMAS's, and the MLAS cards were packaged later with bluebacks. But, in the case of cello's, I suppose you could have either. Is that how you see it? How about taking some x-rays of the pack - you might have a Roberts, Konstanty or Stanky in there - just pulling your cord.

[bosoxfan]

I CANNOT get into that 1968 burlap set to save my life. I have only a couple cards from that set of my favorite players and that is it.[/QUOTE]


I bought my first pack of baseball cards in 1968 and was hooked. At lunch and recess many of us would "shoot" cards towards the school wall from about 8 to 10 feet away. Nearest card to the wall wins and winner would keep all the cards. If you got a "leaner", that was the best, but everyone yet to shoot had 3 shots to knock it down. If they did, they would win. Winner would go last, furthest would shoot first and so on.

I don't know if flipping cards and shooting cards were the same thing. I think when you flip cards you hold the card above your head up against a wall and let it drop. If that is true, I never flipped cards.

Anyway, I LOVED those days. I loved shooting cards. They were some of my best childhood memories. The 68's were what I knew. I remember there were times I'd win cards from 67 and hating them. I hated the 1967 Topps because they weren't the 68's. At the time, to me they were the ugly cards. Some cards would get so beat up. They were needed because those were the ones that didn't bounce of the wall too far. Save the sharper corner cards for knocking down the leaners. Winning a 68 that you didn't have was the best no matter what shape it was in.

Of course times change and the 1967 Topps set is now my favorite set of the sixties, but I will always love the 68's

Rich

[theseeker]

I grew up in suburban Chicago and never saw anyone flipping or tossing cards. I believe that was an east coast thing. Card collecting for us was something to do in between activities, during summer break. We'd all go and get our shoe boxes and sit under a shady tree and have trading sessions.
We did do the dopey card sacrifice, that consisted of one common card, a clothes pin, and a bike, in order to get that cool motorcycle sound effect.

[mckinneyj]

> If you got a "leaner", that was the best

I think that "fliiping" and "shooting" are synonymous - at least they were for us.

For us a "topper" could best a leaner and knocking down a leaner didn't necessarily get you anything. A "topper" was any card that came to rest on top of another. A "topper" always beat the card that it landed on - but when more than 2 were flipping, "toppers" only mattered if they topped the card closest the wall. We often flipped against a wall that had a seam at the bottom where the "floor" met the wall. Cards could slide a bit under the wall - the futher in the better. If a leaner got "topped" by another leaner the "topper" won. If a "leaner" got knocked over then whichever card was closest to the wall won. If the "leaner" fell on top of the card that knocked it down then that former "leaner" was the winner. A "leaner" beat a card that was partially under the wall. And always, only 1 toss per turn. Going last was best and the order was determined by reverse order of who was closest on the prior toss - the winner went last and the one who was furthest from the wall went first... and if some situation came up for which we had no rule whoever was quickest on the draw made one up.