1948-49 Leaf vs. 1952 Topps

[RedsFan1941]

Originally Posted by irv

Well, I hate to jump in here, but if I had to listen to only one person on here with regards to postwar cards, Ted would be the guy.

Many on here have vast knowledge, or far greater knowledge than myself, and Ted is definitely one of those guys who I listen to and don't question. (jmo)

that is certainly your choice. you can understand why people would choose not to just accept everything a person says as the truth, i hope.

[irv]

Originally Posted by tedzan

"Confusion" only to those unfamiliar with the production of this set of cards, Peter.

In 1981, I was doing research for my article in BASEBALL Cards Magazine regarding 1949 BOWMAN vs 1949 LEAF sets. I interviewed former senior employees of both of these
Gum Co. The LEAF employee was involved in the original production of these cards. She told me that the majority of the Rights to the images and the bios of the players were
obtained during 1948 (hence 1948 Copyright). And, the remaining players were obtained in early 1949 (hence 1949 Copyright).

I very well recall as a kid that the LEAF cards were available in March - April 1949 in my neighborhood in Hillside, NJ. I have compared this date with other veteran collectors in
the hobby, and they concur with this release date (collectors from St Louis to Boston).

I have never, ever met anyone who said they acquired these cards in 1948.

We were all too busy collecting 1948 LEAF Football cards. Their Hi # series was issued circa December 1948.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Originally Posted by RedsFan1941

that is certainly your choice. you can understand why people would choose not to just accept everything a person says as the truth, i hope.

There are many on here who have a wealth of information that makes me envious but not many (that I am aware of?) can actually say they remember purchasing these cards when they were young.

That in itself trumps others who are only going by what is written and what they heard from some other collectors who likely weren't around then or didn't collect back then.

[ALR-bishop]

I do not collect the Leaf sets with the exception of 1960 but am aware of similar debates on the year of issue of some Topps test sets and Fleer issues from the late 60s an 70s. Dave Hornish has been a great source of info for me on those debates. Ted too, especially on Bowman sets. I find the debates interesting and enjoy reading them. For myself as a collector since 1957, the exact year of issue is not a crucial issue, but understand why it may be for others.

[RedsFan1941]

Originally Posted by irv

There are many on here who have a wealth of information that makes me envious but not many (that I am aware of?) can actually say they remember purchasing these cards when they were young.

That in itself trumps others who are only going by what is written and what they heard from some other collectors who likely weren't around then or didn't collect back then.

that was kind of my point in referencing the baseball card shows from the 1970s. there were a lot of people in those rooms who collected cards in the 1940s and 50s.

i'm not saying ted is incorrect on this one. just that it's ridiculous to think that professional graders are the ones who started calling them 1948 Leafs. everybody 40 years ago called them that. if ted remembers buying cards in the 1940s, i'm sure he remembers that fact from the mid 1970s.

and i'll stick with my premise about not taking everything someone says as the gospel, whether it's ted or whoever.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by RedsFan1941

that is certainly your choice. you can understand why people would choose not to just accept everything a person says as the truth, i hope.

Words of wisdom Ronnie.... Ted is as knowledgeable as it gets and knows more than you forgot....Have a nice day!

[Lorewalker]

In my last post on this thread I mentioned that I had looked at the backs of 6 cards from the set. I have since looked at another 20. All reference 1948 stats. Still far from every card in the set but it makes it hard to argue this was a 1948 issue when stats are showing from that season. I suppose an argument might be able to be made it was a 48 and 49 set is any of the other backs reference stats from the 47 season. Would not make a heck of a lot of sense for a card co to release a set, at the end of the calendar year, after the season concluded...Winter is a long time for baseball fans.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

In my last post on this thread I mentioned that I had looked at the backs of 6 cards from the set. I have since looked at another 20. All reference 1948 stats. Still far from every card in the set but it makes it hard to argue this was a 1948 issue when stats are showing from that season. I suppose an argument might be able to be made it was a 48 and 49 set is any of the other backs reference stats from the 47 season. Would not make a heck of a lot of sense for a card co to release a set, at the end of the calendar year, after the season concluded...Winter is a long time for baseball fans.

Hi Chase

You make a great point here. And, anyone with modicum of common sense would realize this.

Furthermore, I can add this fact to the argument.....LEAF launched their 98-card Football set in the Fall of 1948. The 1st series of 49 cards were available in October - November.
They issued their 2nd series in December. There is NO WAY that they could have produced the BB set in that timeline. The 1948 Football set was very popular and LEAF was busy
printing tons of FB cards.

Thanks Chase for your very astute input to this conversation.


And, thanks to CMIZ5290 for your compliment.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Exhibitman]

Leaf boxing was issued both with white and gray stocks. I am collecting a white stock set. The famous Graziano SP that was pulled very early in the print run, possibly before the cards were issued, is a white stock card.

As for the OP, the 1952 Topps set is one of the nicest looking sets ever issued. The Leaf set is fugly. I prefer this:




to this:



every day of the week.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Leaf boxing was issued both with white and gray stocks. I am collecting a white stock set. The famous Graziano SP that was pulled very early in the print run, possibly before the cards were issued, is a white stock card.

As for the OP, the 1952 Topps set is one of the nicest looking sets ever issued. The Leaf set is fugly. I prefer this:




to this:



every day of the week.

Hi Adam

The 1948 LEAF boxing cards were the very first color Sportscards which I collected (at age 10). I completed both WHITE and GRAY versions.
The WHITE backed cards were 1st available in the Summer/Fall of 1948. This date is confirmed by Tony Zale's bio, which reads that he beat
Graziano in their final match (KO in the 3rd Round) on June 10th 1948.


Adam, as you know, these cards were extremely popular (nationwide). LEAF continued printing them into 1949. And, that's why there are cards
with both WHITE and GRAY cardboard stock. LEAF printers switched to GRAY stock in 1949 for their BB and FB cards (and these Boxing cards).



1948 issue .................................................. ....... 1949 issue




Hey guys,
For those of you still yearning for a LEGITIMATE 1948-1949 set, this Boxing set is the one you are looking for. NOT the BB card set.






TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[ALR-bishop]

"To me, boxing is like a ballet...except there's no music....and no choreography...and the dancers hit each other".....Jack Handey

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I have no reason at all to doubt Ted, but that's what's so confusing (to me anyhow), this isn't ancient history at all. It would be like someone today getting the date wrong on an 80s issue.

Peter
This LEAF set has been confusing to many who did not collect these cards in 1949. As I said in a previous post here....Beckett's 1979 Price Guide was not sure what year to assign
to this set, so they started the 1948-49 identification. And, it stayed that way until the mid-1990's......when Beckett corrected it to 1949. Bob Lemke's Standard Catalog is correct
with the 1949 date.

I was surprised that there was not a reply to my Post #26. So let's try this again. Shown here is a LEAF premium (7" x 5 1/2") which was enclosed in the same 24-count wax-pack
box that the LEAF cards were packaged in. SGC has correctly labelled it 1949 LEAF. But this is at variance with SGC's labelling of the LEAF BB cards as 1948-49 LEAF GUM CO.

These two pieces should have identical labelling. This is a one example of how the grading companies are screwed up on this subject.


. .



This discussion has become tiresome. If some of you still question the information which I've imparted in these Posts, then counter it with some meaningful replies.
Otherwise, take your "negativism" elsewhere. It's not needed here.

In any event, I refer you to my OLD CARDBOARD (Issue #9) article (8 pages) regarding the 1949 LEAF BB set. I received a tremendous amount of compliments
on it. Contact Lyman Hardeman for back copies of this magazine.

Thanks Dale (#30) and Al (post #35) for the kind words.....I really appreciate them.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Peter
This LEAF set has been confusing to many who did not collect these cards in 1949. As I said in a previous post here....Beckett's 1979 Price Guide was not sure what year to assign
to this set, so they started the 1948-49 identification. And, it stayed that way until the mid-1990's......when Beckett corrected it to 1949. Bob Lemke's Standard Catalog is correct
with the 1949 date.

I was surprised that there was not a reply to my Post #26. So let's try this again. Shown here is a LEAF premium (7" x 5 1/2") which was enclosed in the same 24-count wax-pack
box that the LEAF cards were packaged in. SGC has correctly labelled it 1949 LEAF. But this is at variance with SGC's labelling of the LEAF BB cards as 1948-49 LEAF GUM CO.

These two pieces should have identical labelling. This is a one example of how the grading companies are screwed up on this subject.


. .



This discussion has become tiresome. If some of you still question the information which I've imparted in these Posts, then counter it with some meaningful replies.
Otherwise, take your "negativism" elsewhere. It's not needed here.

In any event, I refer you to my OLD CARDBOARD (Issue #9) article (8 pages) regarding the 1949 LEAF BB set. I received a tremendous amount of compliments
on it. Contact Lyman Hardeman for back copies of this magazine.

Thanks Dale (#30) and Al (post #35) for the kind words.....I really appreciate them.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Hey Pat

The STANDARD CATALOG of VINTAGEBASEBALL CARDS (Bob LEMKE) on Page 241 lists the LEAF BB SET as 1949.

What catalog are you talking about ?


T-Rex
.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hey Pat

The STANDARD CATALOG of VINTAGEBASEBALL CARDS (Bob LEMKE) on Page 241 lists the LEAF BB SET as 1949.

What catalog are you talking about ?


T-Rex
.

September 29 2016 edition
DSCN0618.jpg

[tedzan]

Well, since Bob Lemke no longer edits this Price Guide, the LEAF BB card set has been INCORRECTLY changed to 1948.
There was no one more knowledgeable than Bob Lemke when it came to BB card dates. This change is mis-leading.

Anyhow. at least they have the LEAF premiums correctly dated as a 1949 issue. Which leads me to ask you this, Pat.

Enclosed inside each 24-count box of LEAF wax-packs was one of the nine premiums. I recall this well as a kid buying
LEAF packs. So, how can anyone in their right mind claim that these BB cards are not a 1949 issue ?

And tell us.....what year do you believe these LEAF BB cards were issued ? ?









TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[ALR-bishop]

I do miss corresponding with Bob over card issues, and still use the last Catalog he edited, along with the last Catalog with post 80 issues. Who is the current editor ?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Well, since Bob Lemke no longer edits this Price Guide, the LEAF BB card set has been INCORRECTLY changed to 1948.
There was no one more knowledgeable than Bob Lemke when it came to BB card dates. This change is mis-leading.

Anyhow. at least they have the LEAF premiums correctly dated as a 1949 issue. Which leads me to ask you this, Pat.

Enclosed inside each 24-count box of LEAF wax-packs was one of the nine premiums. I recall this well as a kid buying
LEAF packs. So, how can anyone in their right mind claim that these BB cards are not a 1949 issue ?

And tell us.....what year do you believe these LEAF BB cards were issued ? ?





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I don't know Ted I was only commenting on the finger being pointed
at the grading companies.