Reflections on 1949 BOWMAN's (25 HOFers, many Rookies)...show-N-tell us of your cards

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by jason.1969

Here is a SABR poll from May, which shows at least 1949 is gaining steam. I linked readers to your excellent article at http://oldcardboard.com/misc/issue09/issue09.asp


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Jason

That poll shows us that 42 % of collectors have been "brainwashed" by PSA with their phony "1948" date on their flips. PSA should recall every single 1949 LEAF card
that they have graded, and re-grade them correcting the the date on their flip. But, we know they won't do this. So, the "fake news" will continue.

Hey guys,
I appeal to your common sense of logic. Certain bios on the backs of the 1949 LEAF cards provide proof as to when these cards were issued. I do no expect you to start
reading numerous bios to prove it to yourself. Displayed here is one card that tells the whole story, Lou Boudreau's bio......check-it-out.

.

Lou Boudreau's MVP Award was announced in December of 1948.

And, for those of you who would counter..... "well some cards were issued in 1948, while others in 1949". Well. that is sheer "horse-crap".
The COPYRIGHT date on the back of each card identifies when its Bio was written and registered.

Here is an uncut sheet of the 1st Series cards issued in early Spring of 1949. I, and many other old-time collectors, acquired these cards in 1949.
And NO ONE, absolutely NO ONE, has ever said they acquired them in 1948. I did a survey some years ago in which I asked this of collectors who
grew up in various parts of the country in the late 1940's.





For those of you who value accurate dating of BB card sets, I leave you with this....get a copy of http://oldcardboard.com/misc/issue09/issue09.asp.
You'll find it worthwhile and very interesting.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Jason

That poll shows us that 42 % of collectors have been "brainwashed" by PSA with their phony "1948" date on their flips. PSA should recall every single 1949 LEAF card
that they have graded, and re-grade them correcting the the date on their flip. But, we know they won't do this. So, the "fake news" will continue.

Hey guys,
I appeal to your common sense of logic. Certain bios on the backs of the 1949 LEAF cards provide proof as to when these cards were issued. I do no expect you to start
reading numerous bios to prove it to yourself. Displayed here is one card that tells the whole story, Lou Boudreau's bio......check-it-out.

.

Lou Boudreau's MVP Award was announced in December of 1948.

And, for those of you who would counter..... "well some cards were issued in 1948, while others in 1949". Well. that is sheer "horse-crap".
The COPYRIGHT date on the back of each card identifies when its Bio was written and registered.

Here is an uncut sheet of the 1st Series cards issued in early Spring of 1949. I, and many other old-time collectors, acquired these cards in 1949.
And NO ONE, absolutely NO ONE, has ever said they acquired them in 1948. I did a survey some years ago in which I asked this of collectors who
grew up in various parts of the country in the late 1940's.





For those of you who value accurate dating of BB card sets, I leave you with this....get a copy of http://oldcardboard.com/misc/issue09/issue09.asp.
You'll find it worthwhile and very interesting.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I think it's pretty obvious that the Leafs are a 1949 issue, the Boudreau being the most concrete evidence that makes 1948 100% impossible. I've wondered how this set got stamped with the 1948 date everywhere though. This was a fairly major issue, and not a very old set when the catalogs first began, unlike many other sets that have been attributed with inaccurate dates. In the early periodicals, does anyone know if these were correctly labelled as 1949, and the mistake came later? Or have these just always been labelled with the wrong year? Most all the catalogs and checklists I have access too from before the last few years insist it is a 1948 issue, not just PSA's slabs.


It would be a fun project to more thoroughly trace some of the historiography than the history of the sets themselves, how a lot of the misinformation that has been spread happened (T206 Hustler backs, T220 Silver border Jack Goodman, N28 being an 1888 issue, etc.)

As to Jackie:
1947 Bond Bread
1947 Bond Bread Exhibit
1947 Bond Bread Dual Sided
1947 Bond Bread Jackie Series (13 cards)
1948 R346 blue Tint
1948 Swell Sports Thrills

By my count, that's at least 18 different cards before his Leaf and Bowman were issued. If his Leaf and Bowman are rookies, than almost all the cards in the sets is a "rookie," even though those players are on many earlier cards.


Since posts are better with a card, here's the 3 Leafs I got in the mail this week, including Mr. Boudreau. I don't like this set quite enough to pay up the big bucks for the scarce second series, but I'd like to complete Series 1, raw and low-grade.

[samosa4u]

I'm going to take Ted's word for it. Alright, so it's 1949 Leaf, got it. However, it's still his rookie card and that's the point I was trying to make. It's the first Jackie Robinson made by a major US card manufacturer. Bond Bread, to me, is garbage. It looks like they printed most of their stuff in 1947 and one Buffalo Bisons set ten years later, and that's it.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

I'm going to take Ted's word for it. Alright, so it's 1949 Leaf, got it. However, it's still his rookie card and that's the point I was trying to make. It's the first Jackie Robinson made by a major US card manufacturer. Bond Bread, to me, is garbage. It looks like they printed most of their stuff in 1947 and one Buffalo Bisons set ten years later, and that's it.

Actually, figuring out the "rookie" card game turned me off back in the early 1980's, when many in this hobby referred to Mantle's 1952 TOPPS card as his "rookie" card.
And, I would flip the pages of my 1951 BOWMAN set to card #253 (Mantle) and I wondered what were these people "smoking"

Whatever....this BOWMAN "train" has switched on to a sidetrack.....and, it's time to get it back on the main line.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

Riding again on the BOWMAN rails....if you are interested in additional info regarding the PCL set, tune into an article Mark Macrae and I
published in the VCBC magazine (Issue # 10).

You'll find it interesting, as we provide more insight into these mysterious cards, and actual collector's experiences regarding these cards.



...…...... extremely rare 1949 PCL wrapper .................................................. ...............….. regular 5-cent 1949 wrapper



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

I am quite surprised at the responses to this thread regarding the fascination with the color error cards found in the set.
I'm working a special set (approx. 40 % complete) comprising of various color errors. Shown here is a sampling of some
of the printing mistakes found in this set.

Feel free to post some of your printing mistakes here.


SLATE Lo # and Hi # cards





PINK and YELLOW cards (Should be RED and ORANGE)




7th sheet SLATE cards (Salkeld and Muncrief normally YELLOW)





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

Speaking about "color-less" BOWMAN cards.....reminds me, I still recall in the Spring of 1950 when us kids opened our 1st packs of 1950 BOWMAN BB cards,
and the thrill we got seeing all those colorful cards.....Yogi Berra, Jackie Robinson, Robin Roberts, Bob Feller, Phil Rizzuto, Pee Wee Reese, Warren Spahn, etc.











TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[jimmysuitcase]

Ted,
I have a Doby hi# that has a light-colored (not gray) back and appears to have been handcut. I bought it as a younger collector before I knew that hi#s "only" came with gray backs, and I dismissed my purchase as a reprint.

This past weekend, I saw a long-time dealer and noticed he had two Doby cards in his display case. Upon examination, I noticed that one was legit/typical and the other had a light-colored back like mine, and it was also hand cut. When I asked him about the card's authenticity, he said that it was something akin to (though maybe not precisely) a box-bottom display card.

Do you have any knowledge of or examples of these yourself, or is it likely that we may both have reprints?

James

[Bram99]

Originally Posted by tedzan

I am quite surprised at the responses to this thread regarding the fascination with the color error cards found in the set.
I'm working a special set (approx. 40 % complete) comprising of various color errors. Shown here is a sampling of some
of the printing mistakes found in this set.

Feel free to post some of your printing mistakes here.


SLATE Lo # and Hi # cards





PINK and YELLOW cards (Should be RED and ORANGE)




7th sheet SLATE cards (Salkeld and Muncrief normally YELLOW)





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Hey Ted, this is an interesting subset you are collecting.

Anyone attempting to collect an autographed version of each of the 1949 Bowman cards? I just bought some. Not sure how hard that would be to pursue. Tony

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Bram99

Hey Ted, this is an interesting subset you are collecting.

Anyone attempting to collect an autographed version of each of the 1949 Bowman cards? I just bought some. Not sure how hard that would be to pursue. Tony

Hey Tony

Since you asked. Here is a small sample of my autographed 1949 BOWMAN cards. Some of them were signed in person. Others were already autographed, so I cannot vouch for those.

One of the friendliest ballplayers was Johnny Mize. We had a really interesting conversation. I reminded him of the 1952 World Series when he single-handedly beat the Dodgers.
When our conversation ended, he invited me to visit him, if I was ever in the Demorest, Georgia area.

In 1987, on my way to Florida, I stopped by to see Johnny. He was a tremendous guy.
.




TED Z

T206 Reference
.