1950, 52 bowman

[Archive]

Posted By: David Poses

i've been collecting 1950 and 1952 bowmans on and off for a few years on the side (main focus: t206 southern leaguers). i think its time to pick one of the two sets and get more serious. which do you like better? why?

any thoughts, anecdotes, etc, are appreciated. happy holidays...

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

I prefer the 50's myself. I think the almost square look makes it look like an even earlier issue. You can't go wrong either way though.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason L

I like the shape, the lack of any writing on the front, and the artistic look...If it were me, I would start with that year

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul S

Tough call. '50 is neat and landmarkesque because Bowman really took large step forward in the artwork style from the year before...there's not as big a leap between the '50 and '52 though. However, for me, as much as I like the '50, the card is just too small in size (for me), the Berra pose, for instance. So, something like a full player pose makes the size of the '52 for me, plus the art on that issue ain't no slouch, to be sure.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason L

I have gravitated towards the 1951 Bowman.
I only have 2 cards (trying to buy as high a quality as I can), but I am totally enamored with them for the artwork and what I think are classic images...So far, I have PSA7's of Campanella and Doby
But I have the Cubs team sets from both the 1950 and 1051 Bowman on my wantlist...

[Archive]

Posted By: sagard

It really comes down to player selection to me. If you really want Mantle and Mays you have to go with the '52s. I personally wanted to avoid them because I collect them in many '60s issues and I went with the '50s.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

I consider both among the most-underrated sets in the hobby ... the artwork on the Bowman cards from 1950 to 1952 was as good as any this side of the Turkey Reds and Obaks, as far as I'm concerned. If I had to go with one of he two, I'd definitely take the 1952s. For one, more than half the 50s are simply head shots as opposed to action poses (the '50 football set has much nicer images). Also, the low numbered 50s are really tough to find in nice shape. I personally believe they're considerably tougher than the '52 Bowman high numbers, which often command a premium, but they're definitely available in nice shape. Also, I can't think of many sets that display as well as the 52s. The poses are remarkably consistent (most are mid-range action poses), the artwork is fantastic and they're very colorful ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

i should mention, part of the consideration is storage. i can't find binder pages that are the right size for the 52s, whereas i have some that fit '50s perfectly. last night i went on a spree and picked up 15 new 1950bs, so i guess that's where i'm leaning, although i do agree with the "headshot" comment...

[Archive]

Posted By: Darren

I'll take ted williams and jackie robinson over mantle and mays, if I had to choose(1950 bowman). I also prefer the style of the '50 over the '52. Both sets are great and I collect all bowman issues.