1955 Bowman VS 1955 Topps
RepublicaninMass
Posts: 255 ✭
I am so tired of watching 1955 topps commons in 8 or better receive ridiculous ending bids. (PSa 8's over 500 bucks) I am able to go 100% on my set, however, I dont think an overall grade of 5/6 is that much to brag about, or worth the cost of grading the rest. I also think doing the set right now in 7 is about half the cost of an 8! I also can go about 80-85% of the 1955 Bowman set in 6.5. I noticed on the set registry the Bowman is set is far less collected 25 finest to the '55 topps 64 finest. Are the Bowman commons cheaper? I know the set has many more cards, and are far more condition sensitive, but why is it so much less collected. Has a Campy, Howard RC, and Mantle, is it just topps is better looking, or Bowman faded out after this set?. Also, what has happened in the past after the big dogs (Branca, Fogel, Luchinos, or rearreverendsporttrindleberg and qualityfhorseracing in my case) have completed their sets. Have values, or ending prices diminished rapidly? In short, should I move from one set to the other until the big dogs take their bones and go home???
0
Comments
2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25
2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9
Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs
Nothing on ebay
Topps has the big name rookies, Bowman has Mantle and umpires, and a few variations to make it interesting.
Personally if 7's are half the cost of 8's I'd go for an all 7 set- it is still a near mint set, and they'll be much easier to find.
If you're looking for info on the Bowman set pm Marc S. (mike schmidt on this board). I doubt anyone is more knowledgable about this set, and he may be able to help you get started.
Best of luck, either set is a no lose proposition.
PS I've found people bail out on sets all the time- email everyone on the registry just in case. At the very least you'll be on their list for their 7's when they upgrade to 8's.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
<< <i>i would think that a complete 55 topps set in true ex/mnt not only is somthing to brag about but has great upside potential. >>
Thanks Steve...for the compliment
I also have used the search feature (how bout that!) and checked out all the topics mschmidt has discussed. I think 7's with the occasional low bid on an 8 could do the trick. I was just pissed when I went to the last show and saw the Kruk cards table. I am young and look even younger (ask con40 or packcollector I look about 19-20) I asked, politely I might add, how much the '55 Podres in an 8 was (SMR of about 200) The guys gives me a smirk and tells me "1100 kid"?? People are out of their minds over this set, and Dem bums especially, but 1100 whoa. What about prices when the top dogs stop bidding?
dgf
dgf
Interesting topic.
You are right that Bowman is far less collected (in graded form) than 1955 Topps. There are a number of high-grade 1955 Bowman sets out there in raw form that simply have not been graded yet. Bowman cards are, generally, cheaper than their Topps counterparts. The set, overall, does not seem to be nearly as popular as Topps that year - for many of the reasons listed already. However, as someone who has lived and breathed this set for the last 6+ years - I can tell you that it is a fun one to build. One thing I like about it is that there is not any single card from the set that will break your bank in top grade. Mantle is the most expensive 8 - and Ernie Banks is one of the toughest (popular) HOF cards to find in 8. I think the umpire subset is really cool - and I think the TV design captures the zeitgeist of the 1950s - although perhaps prematurely. I think that, compared to Topps from the same year, there is much better and broader representation from the Yankees and Dodgers sets - which is important given the rivalry of the times and the current popularity of collecting both teams.
As it relates to big dogs - there are two modes of thought. One is that they will simply drive up the prices for upgrades in their currently-collected sets. Some are surprised that, despite a large recent find, relatively low poulation 9s from the 1951 Bowman set, for example, routinely command thousands of dollars each. Alternatively - to the extent that any of them wish to complete the "Bowman run", for example - the 1955 Bowman baseball set will prove to be an infinitely tough set for even the big-money players to accumulate in the grades that they like. You are correct that the set is condition sensitive. In fact - it is the ONLY major set from the 1950s that has yet to be completed in straight NM/MT or better condition - although two collectors are both within one card of completing that task.
Low populations in 1955 Bowman also command huge prices. Although not on the order of other sets from the same era - there are nonetheless quite a few cards from the set with PSA 8 populations of six or less. #232 Birdie Tebbets in PSA 8 was sold this past summer by Peter Lalos for a whopping $1,500. Some of these low population cards even command strong numbers in 7 grade - on the order of $75 - $100. But, overall - 7s are eschewed, and it is such a tough set, I think that is one reason it is not graded out more often. Shoeless Joe's Joe Yanello has a decent story about a recent attempt to grade out parts of a set he purchased - with very difficult results. 8s are exceptionally tough - and 9s are virtually non-existant. It seems as if 1/3 or so of all the existing 9s reside in one set - and over 1/2 of the cards in the set still have never had a PSA 9 or PSA 10 example.
I think the 1955 Bowman set is a very fun one to collect - and it won't break your bank, especially when you combine 7s in with 8s. That is what many people on the Registry seem to have done. FWIW - 7s are a great value, and can often look pretty darn good if you are selective about the 7s you get. I would say go for it. Let 1955 calm down - it eventually will - and build the Bowman set in the meanwhile.
Cheers-
~ms
Is not the more appropriate question: Which set houses the better Don Mossi rookie card? I think 1955 Bowman wins by a landslide:
There is absolutely no comparison between the 1955 Topps set and the 1955 Bowman by virtue of player selection alone. The Topps set has two of the most important rookie cards of all time in Clemente and Koufax. Bowman omits those two and instead includes a number of umpire cards. No one can disagree that Bowman completely dropped the ball on that one.
The Topps set has vibrant colors and both portraits and action images. The television set design of the Bowman set is one of the ugliest designs of all time. (Mind you, I hate wood borders as much as hate faux wood panels on the side of old stationwagons. The 55 Bowman, 62 Topps, 68 Topps and 87 Topps sets are some of my least favorite sets of all time.) While I think 1955 Bowman are ugly even in strong condition, they are absolutely horrible in lower condition because the wear shows up so much more with the dark borders. Anything less than PSA 8 on those cards are completely unacceptable IMHO.
The Bowman set was not appreciated in 1955 and as a result became the last set Bowman produced for a long time. It was not popular then, it is not popular now, and I highly doubt that the 1955 Bowman set will ever become popular with collectors.
I would have to agree 100% with Steve.
PSA 8's and 9's from 50's sets are something that not many can afford. I am working on a 52 Bowman set in the same grade, and I can say that roughly half of my near 50% completion mark were hand picked or submitted by myself.
There is such a thing as a "high grade" PSA 5 or 6. They present very well.
Marc,
I saw some of the most gorgeous 55 Bowmans at the Chicago show last week I've ever seen. Just outrageous. If a person hated 55 Bowman, they would gain a strong measure of respect for them after that display. The '55 Topps set is very nice, but that doesn't mean you're a moron for not collecting them. One question: If Cable had been invented in 1955, would Mossi be able to get HBO for free just by facing due West in the evening?
Koby,
I think Topps omitted someone pretty good, too. Not having Koufax or Clemente has nothing to do with the visual appeal of a baseball card.
There was also no ball to be dropped. Things were quite different 50 years ago. Players were only regionally touted and regional rivalries took precedence of star appeal. You make some fine points in your post, but it's a little disparaging to folks who have built the set. A little tact would go a long way in cases like this...
dgf
I think you are being a tad unfair, although I am definitely biased.
RepublicanMass clearly stated that $$$ was part of the reasons for this consideration. To that extent - the 1955 Bowman set is absolutely much more affordable. Using SMR as a guide - one can easily say that the 1955 Bowman set is 60% larger, but can be purchased for 30-40% less than the 1955 Topps set. That is a huge difference! Especially for those of us that must collect on a budget.
Yes - Bowman does omit Clemente and Koufax. No doubt about it. But Mickey Mantle will always be remembered as the most popular player of the 1950s. And you cannot find him at Topps. Although you can make these comparisons ad nauseum, you can also include Roy Campanella, Pee Wee Reese, Whitey Ford, Richie Ashburn and other HOFers to the list of key players in the Bowman set and not in the Topps.
You elude to the conclusion that 1955 Bowman was unpopular with collectors and, thus, was the last set Bowman ever produced. In fact, Topps purchased Bowman out of the market in January 1956. I think that is a highly different conclusion than that which you draw. Also - in 1955, as it specifically relates to popularity, I can't imagine any young kid in 1955 gave a flying f about either Clemente or Koufax - both of them were well before their prime, though Mantle was the veritable superstar of the Yanks by then.
<< <i>The Great "Koby" has spoken! There you have it! No other opinion matters. >>
Thanks DGF. I could tell there is no sarcasm there.
I actually like both sets.....just playing devil's advocate.
But I do stand by my opinion that wood borders, dark borders and black border look are unattractive in rough condition, while you can get away with more wear on white border cards.
EX cards when well centered do present very nice like Neal said.
the white markings about the face and ear are not on the card but must be from the soft plastic sleeve.
Not mine, but the only one I could find on a moments notice ....
As far as rookie selection goes, don't forget Harmon Killebrew, who also appears in Topps but not Bowman.
Personally, I'm not really into either of the '55 sets. I don't like horizontal cards much. Of course, my opinion on this and $.02 will give you $.02.
Koufax had an immediate following among one group of card collectors at the time - Jewish kids (especially in the New York area). I would not be surprised if this accounted for some of the prevalence of Koufax rookies over Clemente rookies (I'd estimate I'm twice as likely to see a Koufax as a Clemente at a card show in the L. A. area, and Koufax rookies also seem to show up more often than Clemente rookies on ebay).
dgf - no, but if Mossi tilted his head to the right, the clubhouse could pick up Wagon Train.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
awesome!
BTW, I don't care for horizontal cards either. I've tried to like 'em...just don't. Go figure.
dgf
Here are a few for your viewing pleasure!
JEB.
Modern
Vintage
Pre-War
That Clemente card is sharp! I like the Rice too of course and the T218 has great color but man is that guy scrawny looking! Any idea what weight class he fought in?
Dave
Now collecting:
Topps Heritage
1957 Topps BB Ex+-NM
All Yaz Items 7+
Various Red Sox
Did I leave anything out?
I'm right there with you, I've always loved the horizontal cards. The 56 and 60 sets are two of my favorites and how could anyone complain about a 1971 Munson?
Abe
dgf
My Ebay user ID is dromedary1.
If you ever see me bid $2000 on a vintage Topps common, even if it's graded PSA ULTRA-SUPER-GEM-MINT 11, please find me and shoot me.
-Al
Love those 51's!
RayBShotz