Monday, November 30, 2009

1949 Bowman

This is an iconic set, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't filled with bad choices. The cards are ugly, but they aren't as ugly as the 1941 Goudey set. They do come close to that level of ugly.

The players are hard to identify sometimes and team affiliations occasionally do not match the uniform on the front of the card. Still, this is one of the best known sets to come out of the forties.

If you count all the cards picturing or listing the player as being a part of the White Sox, there are a total of thirteen cards. If you choose only to follow the team listing on the back, there are ten cards. If you choose to follow the pretty pictures, there are eleven cards.

12 - Cass Michaels
28 - Don Kolloway
44 - Dave Philley
87 - Randy Gumpert (pictured in a Yankees uniform/back lists White Sox)
96 - Taft Wright (pictured in a White Sox uniform/back lists Athletics)
103 - Joe Tipton (pictured in an Indians uniform/back lists White Sox)
119 - Floyd Baker
133 - Aaron Robinson (pictured in a White Sox uniform/back lists Tigers)
141 - Tony Lupien (pictured in a White Sox uniform/back lists Tigers)
159 - Glen Moulder
175 - Luke Appling
191 - Joe Haynes
217 - Marino Pieretti

Players being out of sync with their uniforms is nothing new to the hobby. This was happening sixty years ago. Information flows much faster than it did back then. There really isn't much of an excuse for this in a modern card set. In 1949, this would have been perfectly acceptable.

The mismatches are sort of endearing to a vintage set like this. Bowman also couldn't decide whether or not to issue the cards with names on the front. Some cards have the name on the front (usually the higher numbers), some do not have the name. Then there are the rare few where both versions can be found of one card. No card affiliated with the White Sox has two versions.

2 comments:

  1. or today they would put the player on the wrong team as a gimmick.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was wondering about the name on the front. I only have one card from this set and it doesn't have the name. I almost thought that you had sets mixed up when I saw the pic. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

    ReplyDelete