I want to start a new Bowman set 1951, 1952, or 1953 What would you do?

[marvymelvin]

I am wanting to start collecting a new set. I have it narrowed down to three. 1951 Bowman, 1952 Bowman, or 1953 Bowman color. I am just looking for your opinion on as many levels as you want to share i.e. difficulty, enjoyability, expense, display quality, length of time needed etc.

I will have to wait for a few months to start due to major spinal cord surgery, but will also be laid up for awhile, so I will have a lot of time on my hands to have some fun window shopping, looking at other peoples collections, browsing the net etc.

My first vintage card I ever owned was a 1951 Bowman Al "Flip" Rosen. It was in a shop back in the day when there were cards stores everywhere. There were a lot of hockey cards, new packs, people buying up 1980's stuff like crazy. I went in planning to buy a 1988-89 OPC Brett Hull "push pin" rookie. I had saved $100 for it and told myself that if I wanted one I should buy it today because it is just going to go up in value. I was also pining over a Hoops David Robinson Rookie. It was a mere $40. I thought if I could have the tandem of Hull and Robinson rookies in my collection I would be set and the envy of everyone.

But then it happened. I saw this old Bowman card on the far left end of a glass shelf in the main display counter. It was $40. I was mesmerized. I bought it and leaned it up on a shelf next to my bed. I was hooked. I never did buy another one from this set, until recently. I no longer have the Rosen unfortunately, (and I also went back a week or so later for the Robinson and Hull at $125 for the pair, not my best investment) but I still remember the amazing colors on that Rosen card. The royal blue and crimson on his hat, the shadows on his arms and uniform, classic batting pose. I thought "wow, if all of the cards in this set are as great..."

I have similar stories to tell about my encounters with a '52 Bowman Mantle but will save that for another post.

Brad

[ALR-bishop]

I am a Topps collector. The only Bowman set I have done is the 53 Bowman color. I did it because it has a great Musial and he did not show up in a Topps set until 1958. I reall like that set

[Section103]

For me, its 1951 all the way. It is my favorite post war set (if not favorite period) aesthetically speaking. The Mantle and Mays are not cheap, of course.

[Econteachert205]

I'd do the 53 bowman set myself, the artistic quality of the photography is perhaps the best of any single set, and the selection is superb. Expensive though, and does not look good at all under vg in my opinion. Not huge numbers wise though... I only have one card, of jackie Jensen, and I love it.

[BradH]

I started the '51s about a year-and-a-half ago and I love it. Started it in VG-EX condition and was nearly done, but then I won a very nice lot in an auction and have tinkered with it a bit and made some nice upgrades.

Not hard to find and I love the artwork. I really like the '53s too, and might do that set next, but the '51s have always been a favorite of mine.

Good luck with whatever set you choose.

[Exhibitman]

53 for me. The color photos are classics.

[savedfrommyspokes]

I am working on 50-55 Bowman's....I really enjoy the artwork on the 50-52s, and the color images on the 53s. As far as ease, the 52 set has been the easiest to build out of the 50-53s.

[Hot Springs Bathers]

Brad- Are those pages made for the 1951-52 Bowmans? Are they still available?

Thanks

[almostdone]

Originally Posted by Hot Springs Bathers

Brad- Are those pages made for the 1951-52 Bowmans? Are they still available?

Thanks

I believe those are standard 9 pocket pages he has. He has centered all of them very well to keep them uniform.

I am working on a 52 Bowman set and am nearly complete. I chose it because it has my favorite Mantle and favorite Mays as well as Musial and Reese, my favorite players. I love the artwork in it and background detail in them.

I don't think you could go wrong with any of the sets. 51 has the big rookies and big price tag, 52 is a classic with great artwork and great overall player selection, and 53 has those beautiful photos and plus just look at the Musial and Reese in it!

Btw, if you get 10 pocket business card size pages (available at any office supply store) the 51's and 52's fit very nicely in them. They don't slide around like they might in a 9 pocket page and makes it easy to flip through your set. Just a thought.

Drew

[kailes2872]

I am going to post 47 of the 160 53 Bowman Colors in low to mid grade (The Musial has a crease). If you choose that route and need a head start, perhaps we can work something out.

[MattyC]

Talk about a fun choice. All are gorgeous; you simply cannot go wrong

[Jayworld]

Personally I like the 1951 and 1952 sets, mostly for the color and the artwork. As an artist/graphic designer, I've always been attracted to "artwork" card sets; i.e. early 1950s Bowman, Goudey, 1953 Topps, etc.

I have 95 cards of the 1952 set (mostly commons) and 59 cards so far from the 1951 set, including Ted Williams and Campanella.

I'd recommend you go with the 1951 Bowman (1st choice) or 1952 Bowman (second choice). As another stated earlier, the 1952 Bowman set is easier to acquire and cheaper (smaller amount of cards and the 2nd year Bowman cards of Mantle and Mays, and no Ted Williams, but you do get a Musial). Of course, many of the poses of the 1951 Bowman set come straight from the 1950 set (just repositioned or re-cropped), so in a way, by collecting the 1951 set, you are getting much of the 1950 set....

Have fun!

[brightair]

My answer - start them all.
Who knows which set you will have an opportunity to get a starter lot at a reasonable price? No point to pass it up just because you decided to start the other set.
Start them all, and work on them as time and opportunities permit. They are all beautiful and fun in their own rights, and you will enjoy the chases. Hopefully there will be time to finish or at least come close (the Mantles are pricey) on all, especially if you are not too condition sensitive.
Best of luck!
Richard D

[marvymelvin]

Thanks so much for all of your comments. I agree with all of your sentiments and this is why it is difficult. As for the Mantles, I have both a 51 and a 52. No 53 yet. So I have a big step already overcome. Now for the fun. I will keep you informed as I peruse over the next month or so and finally decide what to do. I like the idea of all three but I have trouble when I have too many things going at once. I am more likely to focus on one, but I do like the idea and will consider it.

[refz]

There all great sets.. but there is no better than a nice looking 1953 bowman color in my opinion.

[dzolot]

Old thread - don't ask how I found it! Ha!

Anyway, hope your surgery went well.

What did you decide for the set?

Here is a video of my 1951 bowman set - def my favorite and my recommendation!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BK1xPQBbU04

[bobsbbcards]

Originally Posted by dzolot

Here is a video of my 1951 bowman set - def my favorite and my recommendation!

Beautiful set! Sweet PSA 6 Mantle is shown at 7:09 for those who like to watch videos of Mantle cards.

[clydepepper]

Definitely, 1953 Color. It has more great images than the others. But, there are great cards in each issue...

1952 Bowman MICKEY MANTLE PSA-5.jpg

1953-Bowman Color-59-MICKEY-MANTLE-PSA-7.jpg

1954 Bowma 66- TED WILLIAMS PSA-5.jpg

1954 BOWMAN - WILLIE MAYS PSA-8.jpg

1954B MICKEY MANTLE PSA7.jpg

1955 Bowman Mickey Mantle PSA-7.jpg

1948 Bowman Yogi Berra RC PSA-6.jpg

1950 BOWMAN - RICHIE ASHBURN PSA-7.jpg

1953 BOWMAN COLOR - WHITEY FORD PSA-5.jpg

1953 BOWMAN COLOR- BOB FELLER PSA-5.jpg

1953 Bowman Color Reese PSA-7.jpg

1953 BOWMAN COLOR- STAN MUSIAL PSA-7.jpg

1953 Bowman Color- YOGI BERRA PSA-6.jpg

1954 Bowman Yogi Berra PSA-8.jpg

1950 BOWMAN - RALPH KINER PSA-7.jpg

1951 BOWMAN GUS ZERNIAL PSA 8.jpg

1952 BOWMAN - WARREN SPAHN PSA-7.jpg

1953 BOWMAN COLOR - EARLY WYNN PSA-6.jpg

[ajquigs]

I'm curious if anyone else feels this way. While I agree that the 53s have great photography, I've found I'm partial to 51 because I want names printed on the front. I guess to me it's part of what makes a baseball card a baseball card.

[irv]

Originally Posted by dzolot

Old thread - don't ask how I found it! Ha!

Anyway, hope your surgery went well.

What did you decide for the set?

Here is a video of my 1951 bowman set - def my favorite and my recommendation!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BK1xPQBbU04

I always enjoy your vids, Dzolot. Very nice collection you have!

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Definitely, 1953 Color. It has more great images than the others. But, there are great cards in each issue...

Beautiful cards, Clyde!