1952 Bowman Large

[clamendo]

It's not a myth. The cards at the end of the sheet are tough because bowman went from a small size card to a large format. I think cards #1, 9, 63, 72 in the low series are tough in nice shape. Also, the corresponding 4 corner cards on sheet #2 (with Ronzani and Lansford in the bottom corners. Being the last card may contribute a little.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by clamendo

It's not a myth. The cards at the end of the sheet are tough because bowman went from a small size card to a large format. I think cards #1, 9, 63, 72 in the low series are tough in nice shape. Also, the corresponding 4 corner cards on sheet #2 (with Ronzani and Lansford in the bottom corners. Being the last card may contribute a little.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Every population report analysis I've seen done says that it is a myth that the first and last cards in a set (in general) are found in lower grade. That's what I stated above. Cards on the borders of sheets tend to be found in lower grade with the corners particularly susceptible to damage. As the SPs in the Bowman Large set are all on the borders, this definitely makes them not only more scarce (as SPs) but more likely to be found in lower grade (as border cards).

However, there is no evidence that Lansford is found in lower grade than the rest of the SPs. Here is the current PSA on the Bowman Large SPs. Across the top is Total Population, Population at high grade (PSA 8 and above), and the percentage of high grade cards.



While the percentage of high grade cards for Lansford is on the low side, there are numerous other SPs that have a lower percentage of high grade cards. Why aren't these cards as pricey as the Lansford? The only logical explanation is that the Lansford card is perceived to be more difficult to find in higher grade due to it being the "last card in the set".

It's simply not true.

jeff