How many to a series? Let's see some 1955 Bowman miscuts and uncut material

[G1911]

218 Adcock, 219 Lockman, 220 Hearn all with the 1-64 border at left. Presumably a strip of cards in numerical order above a row with the 1-64 wood, at least some of the time.

[G1911]

These panels are the only uncut material I know: https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=47109

Certainly supports skip numbering, and that not even all the highs are highs.

[Zach Wheat]

Interesting. I can dig out the Baker card if you need a better scan, if I still have it. I gave a bunch of my '55 Bowman duplicates to another board member.

[Volod]

Originally Posted by G1911

These panels are the only uncut material I know: https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=47109

Certainly supports skip numbering, and that not even all the highs are highs.

Here is an article by Bob Lemke, published in the Oct. 1985 issue of Baseball Cards Magazine. On page 3 is another uncut sheet that may be of interest. The other pages are also interesting for collectors of the set.

[G1911]

Thank you gents, 7 Baker can be added to the list.

Interesting Lemke apparently had it figured out. That fits with the evidence of the miscuts; odd this doesn't seem to have been brought up anywhere public in almost 40 years. I guess we're now looking to see these sheets for the final proof that this is indeed the case. It's a huge sheet if this is the case, especially for Bowman.

[Zach Wheat]

large sheet size isn't surprising....based on the little I know about '52 Topps sheets, I assumed the panel of 70 cards in the previous auctions were only partial sheets.

Good detective work on all of the above.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Zach Wheat

large sheet size isn't surprising....based on the little I know about '52 Topps sheets, I assumed the panel of 70 cards in the previous auctions were only partial sheets.

Good detective work on all of the above.

It’s surprising because Bowman was using much smaller sheets before this. This Bowman sheet, if true, contains twice as many cards as a 1952 Topps sheet, whereas Bowman had used smaller sheets in the past.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by G1911

It’s surprising because Bowman was using much smaller sheets before this. This Bowman sheet, if true, contains twice as many cards as a 1952 Topps sheet, whereas Bowman had used smaller sheets in the past.

I think Bowman was using smaller iterations previously but the sheets were not just 32 or 36 cards.

The funny thing about the 55's is the salesman samples can sometimes be found with light and dark woods.