It's 1955 and you have a nickel

[darkhorse9]

Hop into a time machine for a moment back to July 1955. You're eight years old and standing at the candy counter holding a nickel and staring at a box of Topps baseball cards and a box of Bowman.

Which one do you buy and why?

Here are ground rules.

Rookie cards mean nothing to you.
Future value seems unthinkable
There are no checklists so you have no clue on what players are possible, or even what series you're getting.
The Topps/Bowman battle isn't news and you don't understand player contracts anyway.
Your only guide is your 8 year old mind.

What do you do?

[ALR-bishop]

I was 5 in 1955 and did not open my first pack until 1957 ( my parents did buy me cards in 1956). I might have gone the Bowman route because of the color TV format. In retrospect it was unique, but apparently a bust because the set did not due well against the Topps issue. The problem may have been so few families had a color TV in that year. But in hindsight I think the TV concept may have intrigued me ( and I would not have known about all those umpire cards )

[LuckyLarry]

I looked for images of the wrappers and Bowmans claimed 9 picture cards and bubble gum for 5c so that would probably have been my choice!
Larry

[commishbob]

Originally Posted by LuckyLarry

I looked for images of the wrappers and Bowmans claimed 9 picture cards and bubble gum for 5c so that would probably have been my choice!
Larry

Would have been my choice as well, for the same reason.

But then I'd have walked back down Flatbush Avenue and asked my grandfather for another* nickel and gone back to the candy store and bought a Topps pack.

*--he'd have given it to me for sure. I was his first grandkid and he spoiled me rotten.

[profholt82]

1955? I'd have been careful to not prevent my parents from gettting together at the "Enchantment Under the Sea" dance.

[CobbSpikedMe]

Well, when I was 8 I remember liking Topps cards much more than the Bowman ones so I'd have probably picked up the Topps pack. I didn't really start to appreciate the Bowman cards until much later in life. Now I really like them a lot.

[Hxcmilkshake]

Originally Posted by profholt82

1955? I'd have been careful to not prevent my parents from gettting together at the "Enchantment Under the Sea" dance.

Calvin?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by LuckyLarry

I looked for images of the wrappers and Bowmans claimed 9 picture cards and bubble gum for 5c so that would probably have been my choice!
Larry

Same here. Although if I knew Mantle was not in the Topps set that would have been the deciding factor.

[CobbSpikedMe]

I'm surprised at how few folks have said Topps in this scenario. I mean it's not even close. I think I'm the only one who would've chosen the Topps cards.

[1963Topps Set]

I have always been a Topps man myself. I do not like any of the Bowman designs. No thought to them. Topps was bold and innovative. That is my direction and nickel.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

I'm surprised at how few folks have said Topps in this scenario. I mean it's not even close. I think I'm the only one who would've chosen the Topps cards.

I would have picked Topps. The 54 Bowman set was the ugliest set of the 50s until they made the 55 Bowman set. The 1955 Topps set is the best Topps set of the 50s and ranks 2nd overall to 1953 Bowman. I can't figure out what happened to Bowman after great sets from 1950-1953. It is like they ceased caring in 1954 and 1955. I hated the 1954 and 1955 Bowman cards as a kid and never tried to collect them.

[the 'stache]

I'd have probably gone for the Bowman pack.