Does Everyone Understand Pre-War?

[Bosox Blair]

I log into the Pre-War forum today to find three front page threads about: Clemente, Jackie Robinson, and Rizzuto.

Not one of these guys played pro ball Pre-War. (Rizzuto played a bit during the War, but not Pre-War...most of his career was after the War.)

I like the enthusiasm of the new members, but maybe they don't understand that there is a separate forum for Post-War? (I don't go there because I only care about Pre-War.)

There is also another front page thread about 1951 Topps cards.

I'm not a moderator, but it is frustrating to have to sift through threads that don't belong on this forum.

Rant over. :)

Cheers,
Blair

[drcy]

Sorry, my mistake. I thought it was Pre-Gwar.

[brianp-beme]

I agree, not aGwar. I don't think I have made a single post-war post over my Net54 career (I consider it a career), and have noticed the board drifting up a decade or more as time goes by. Come on people, start the pre-war post machine! I will start a pre-war thread up here shortly, once I figure out what in the fadoodle I want to post about.

By the way, Phil Rizzuto started his MLB in April 1941, pre-US involvement in WW2. I know he has a Double Play card.

Brian

[toledo_mudhen]

hmmm.... must be a slow news day

[swarmee]

No, it's a reasonable complaint. There are Off-Topic boards, there are modern boards, and there are post-war boards. So everything that gets posted there is better off somewhere else. Prince nor Jake Arrieta are pre-war baseball players. It is becoming clutter.

[glynparson]

What does it take a whole 5-10 seconds to read the title of the thread? I would rather see some off topics then have the board be stagnant with no fresh discussions. I understand there is a postwar board but i believe we all know this is the main board on this site. I too would like more prewar discussions on the prewar board but am certainly not bothered by talk of other vintage payers.

[buymycards]

Hi Blair, I agree with you. Put the post war threads in the post war area. Why are they on the main board? The same with the Prince thread. (fyi -I am a big fan of Prince) There are 1000's of forums available, so why would someone put a Prince thread on the main page of a pre-war baseball card forum? Everyone knows that Prince is dead and adding a thread on this forum doesn't contribute anything. It would be appropriate in the Water Cooler section, but not the main page.

It really isn't a big deal, and it only takes a few seconds to skip over a thread, but it is a little weird. BTW, I love this forum and I have a great deal of respect for Leon and the way that he moderates the forum.

Rick

[shernan30]

A few hot topic post-war/modern threads are perfectly fine. My big gripe is these threads get more discussion than the pre-war threads. Also, when we talk about post-war and modern players and events how about throwing in a few comparisons to pre-war.

Arrieta threw a no-hitter, so did Cy Young, Bumpus Jones, Nap Rucker, ... Heck, Addie Jose had back to back no-hitters for all of MLB (October 2 1908 then April 20 1910).

If we touch on these topics in the pre-war section, let's include some pre-war history along with them.

[4815162342]

I rarely start a thread, so it figures that my OT thread about the Cubbies is the last straw. :(

[kevinlenane]

My bad on the 51 Topps thread - I kind of assumed (wrongly) that near war discussion topics happened here since there isn't another highly trafficked page for this. Anyway, you have my solemn pledge to not violate the pre-war date again. Now, is it 39 when the war began or 41 when the US entered?

[ZachS]

Prince was definitely post-war

[Leon]

I agree with this but at the same time certainly undertsand the issue. Heck, it could be/probably is my fault. My goal is to have the place not be stagnant and a fun place to be while focusing on what we all love, the sportscard hobby. I don't think anyone can say we don't try to keep it organized. That being said Off Topics have always been allowed on the front page in moderation. That is why sometimes they get moved and sometimes not. Big news events are ok for an off topic and Princes death is big to many of us. I watched about 30 minutes to an hour of his songs yesterday. Oh, the memories. Overall I say give Peace a chance and try to put things in the correct places. And Babe says this is the way he would run the board too...except he would order up some hot dogs and hamburgers to eat between innings. Happy collecting too!!


What does it take a whole 5-10 seconds to read the title of the thread? I would rather see some off topics then have the board be stagnant with no fresh discussions. I understand there is a postwar board but i believe we all know this is the main board on this site. I too would like more prewar discussions on the prewar board but am certainly not bothered by talk of other vintage payers.

[Buythatcard]

I personally don't mind seeing post war stories pop up on this board. I like to broaden my horizons from time to time. There is always something new to learn.
How many times do we have to beat a dead horse over the same pre war stories?
Throw in a few post war stories to make things interesting. I think there are more important things in this world to complain about.

[Jobu]

I don't mind mixing things up a bit with a few post-war and ot threads. What bothers me is when people whine about T206 threads on the pre-war board, which is right where they belong.

[JustinD]

I agree with this but at the same time certainly undertsand the issue. Heck, it could be/probably is my fault. My goal is to have the place not be stagnant and a fun place to be while focusing on what we all love, the sportscard hobby. I don't think anyone can say we don't try to keep it organized. That being said Off Topics have always been allowed on the front page in moderation. That is why sometimes they get moved and sometimes not. Big news events are ok for an off topic and Princes death is big to many of us. I watched about 30 minutes to an hour of his songs yesterday. Oh, the memories. Overall I say give Peace a chance and try to put things in the correct places. And Babe says this is the way he would run the board too...except he would order up some hot dogs and hamburgers to eat between innings. Happy collecting too!!

I am totally with this. I can slide by anything that does not interest me and honestly anything to do with collecting interests me.

I think we all know that if the front page was stagnant and the amount of new posts dries up people will visit less. Less visits multiplies as something else replaces it in your head and the board dies.

It has happened to many boards before and will happen again. Variety is the spice of life. The board needs traffic.

[Rookiemonster]

To improve is to change ; to be perfect is to change often

There is nothing permanent except change.

[begsu1013]

french cries and wahburgers.

[rats60]

My bad on the 51 Topps thread - I kind of assumed (wrongly) that near war discussion topics happened here since there isn't another highly trafficked page for this. Anyway, you have my solemn pledge to not violate the pre-war date again. Now, is it 39 when the war began or 41 when the US entered?

Prewar should be 1941 and earlier signifying a semi regular production of sets up to 1941 and then a complete stop because of war rationing from 1942-45 and then not really picking up again until 1948.

[Leon]

Prewar should be 1941 and earlier signifying a semi regular production of sets up to 1941 and then a complete stop because of war rationing from 1942-45 and then not really picking up again until 1948.

Personally, I think of pre-war as 1945 and back.....so for me it's pre-end of wwII...... no one will get a thread moved posting a baseball card from 1945 and back....

[Rookiemonster]

There has been a lot of wars .so I like to think that pre war refers to the gulf war. So keep the posts coming.

[irv]

There has been a lot of wars .so I like to think that pre war refers to the gulf war. So keep the posts coming.

LOL. I thought it was the ongoing, continuous war currently against isis, or has that officially been declared as a war yet?

In all seriousness, having been, and currently being a moderator on a couple other non sport card forums, I know what some are talking about.

I try to do my best by not posting here very often as I currently have no post war cards, but I do read this section and have noticed, imo, where it is appropriate, like the Beaters thread, to post something that isn't pre war.

I guess, going forward, if a thread like the beaters thread is posted and it bothers some, then the OP should state, pre-war only beaters in their thread title, but at the same time, I think that is being petty and bordering on ridiculousness. (jmo)

[Bored5000]

I don't think it is a big deal to have pop culture threads like the death of Prince on the main board or other occasional threads that are not strictly pre-war. It's really that much of a hardship to skip over threads you are not interested in?

IMO, it is less of a nuisance to have threads like that on the main board than it is to have the same constant threads about PWCC/Probstein or the same theme recycled over and over again that eBay sucks. I would rather at least read something new rather than the same topic(s) rehashed continuously.

Edd*e Sm*th.

[ashes13]

As a true collector of baseball cards (and football and basketball cards) since I was 5 years old (I am 46 now) who enjoys and collects everything from t206s, Colgans Chips,American Caramels,Tattoo Orbits, 33-41 Goudeys, 1950s Topps, Regionals, food issues, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, all the way up to picking up current day rookie cards and packs of modern day cards (still enjoy cracking a box of 2016 topps or heritage at the start of the new season just like a kid back in 1970s and 1980s), I never quite understood how long time and real"baseball card" collectors collect ONLY pre-war or ONLY post war cards. While I can understand from time to time focusing on just an era, or just a few sets or just a player, perhaps I am in the minority, but i enjoy reading about someone's 1914 Cracker Jack pick ups as much as I like hearing about someone's 1975 Topps set. I enjoy buying a 1955 Topps Koufax rookie as much as buying a 1935 Zeenut. Pardon my ignorance, but I would be curious to hear from those who collect only pre-war, what makes a thread on 1941 Playballs so much more interesting than a thread on 1948 Bowmans or 1951 Topps Team cards? Or is it as simple as "this is the location for pre-war topics and I don't want to see or read anything about a card issued 3 years after the war ended because there is a post-war forum for that." To those pre-war only collectors, maybe seeing a thread about a 1954 Kaline rookie, is like me visiting a message board site to discuss baseball cards only to see a number of threads on women's shoes or how to cook a quiche? To me, when you get right down to it, as my wife reminds me "cards from any era are still just little photos or renderings of men on pieces of cardboard" yet we strangely all collect and treasure and pay handsomely for these pieces of cardboard with pictures of men on them.

[glchen]

... I never quite understood how long time and real"baseball card" collectors collect ONLY pre-war or ONLY post war cards. ....

I somehow think of it more as "Pre-Topps" (or pre-Bowman) for prewar. Once Topps came around, many collectors just focused on Topps set runs, but is the bulk of their collection. "Prewar" collectors typically have a bunch of different regional issues (unless you're only focused on T206), so there really isn't the concept of set runs for prewar collectors.

[Orioles1954]

Growing up, everyone collected everything. Nineteenth Century, pre-war, modern, regionals, oddball. If they depicted a baseball player, it was cherished.

[frankbmd]

Everyone who starts a thread should indicate whether it is interesting or not in the title.

That would help board members separate the wheat from the chaff.

[Cozumeleno]

I never quite understood how long time and real"baseball card" collectors collect ONLY pre-war or ONLY post war cards. .

I think it's quite easy to do that, actually, and still be a 'real' collector. When I was a kid, I collected only cards from my time period. Nothing before 1986 really mattered much to me because 1. I couldn't afford it and 2. Couldn't identify with many of the players. Plus, none of my friends collected older stuff, either.

When I got a little older, I still collected newer stuff, but started collecting vintage, too. I started with 1948 Bowman and sort of worked my way backwards. A few years ago, I started collecting vintage exclusively. Now, I'm only collecting pre-war. Outside of doing some flipping, I have zero interest in collecting newer stuff at all - that includes even vintage post-war stuff like 1950s stuff. It's all fine, but I just don't have any personal interest in it anymore.

Tastes change - particularly as we get older. To me, you can be a very real card collector and only collect a certain niche while ignoring everything else.

I should add, too, that I think you were correct in your assessment of the pre-war/post-war sections - I think to some people, it's a matter of just wanting to keep those areas separate.

[Beastmode]

Prince was definitely post-war

+

[Beastmode]

Viewers as of now:

Prewar 135
Post war 24
modern 2 (I think these guys are over on Blowout/PSA)

I don't collect pre-war myself and seldom click on those threads (Breaking news, another T206 "show em if you got em" thread just showed up). However, I do find lots of useful information on collecting in general and enjoy the topics that cover all eras.

I've posted several times on this forum, but don't recall if any of my subjects have ever been pre-war. So I'll continue to loiter in this forum unless otherwise asked to leave.

[begsu1013]

Prince was definitely post-war

http://www.thecouchsessions.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/prince.jpg

[buymycards]

Well, I guess what I don't understand is this - If you are posting about a 1954 Aaron RC, why would you NOT put it in the post war area? Why would you put it in the prewar area? If you are posting about a 1983 Gwynn RC, what would make you think that it belongs on the main page of a prewar forum rather than in the 1980's area?

As long as I am venting, why is there so much eBay spam on the BST? There is a section for eBay auctions. Don't post your eBay spam in other areas of the BST.

There- I feel better now.

Where do I post my Beanie Babies?

[h2oya311]

Personally, I think of pre-war as 1945 and back.....so for me it's pre-end of wwII...... no one will get a thread moved posting a baseball card from 1945 and back....

I guess I can't show off both of these in the same thread then...poop!

http://photos.imageevent.com/derekgranger/hofrookies1/websize/1945%20Robinson%20SGC.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/derekgranger/hofrookies1/websize/1946%20Robinson_1.jpg

Or these...double poop!

http://photos.imageevent.com/derekgranger/hofrookies1/websize/1945%20Schoendienst.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/derekgranger/hofrookies1/websize/1946%20Schoendienst.jpg

[Peter_Spaeth]

Everyone who starts a thread should indicate whether it is interesting or not in the title.

That would help board members separate the wheat from the chaff.

In some cases that would be redundant of the poster's name.:eek:

[vintagetoppsguy]

Does Everyone Understand Pre-War?

The answer to your question is NO.

I read this thread this morning and didn't comment, but I thought the OP was being too uptight. I moved on to other threads. Then, I read the E90-1 Young thread in total disbelief.

Now, I am in agreement with the OP of this thread. He is spot on. How can anyone that knows anything about E90-1s look at that card and not know it's real? The OP is right. We do need more Pre-War threads, more Pre-War knowledge.

I'm not calling anyone out, so don't take it personal if I quoted you, but here are some of the comments in that thread about the Young:


very...very...BAD!

The color is washed out. The corners are uniformly rounded. It doesn't look like real E90-1 Young cards.

Note how different the background looks. Shadows etc.

and the "quaity" of the type in the name, team...the fake is different...look closely...not the right color either.

All bad, IMO. All exhibit similar corner wear....

obvious fakes

Here's the one that takes the cake about the Young card. "...no way I take this gamble. And I like to gamble. The payoff isn't high enough and it doesn't seem worth the shipping and grading fees to find out." If you have a card in hand and you can't tell if it is fake or not and have to send it to some third party authenticator to determine that for you, you are in the wrong hobby.

Again, not calling anybody out and if I quoted you, don't take it personal. However, many of these comments were made by long time board members that should know the difference between a real and a fake.

The OP of this thread is right - less OT threads and more Pre-War threads - especially when people can't tell the difference between a real or fake E90-1. And I've been guilty of participating in the OT main board threads too. Shame on me. It's just sad though when we (as a group), a Pre-War board, has regressed to the point that we can't tell the difference between a real and fake E90-1 Young, but we can tell you anything about Bryce Harper, Phil Rizzuto, Prince, etc. Again, I've been just as guilty. Shame on us.

[begsu1013]

enough of this.

i get where anyone is coming from w/ the kaline, the 54 aaron threads and things of that sort. (note: those were not my threads)

but prince dying? i mean c'mon. seriously. it's freaking prince. and he's influenced every board member here one way or another even if you don't realize it.

the man was a national treasure. and i bet you go to any message board about any topic and there is a "rip prince" thread.

so quit complaining and comparing the man to a box of 88 donruss that shouldn't be here.

[tschock]

If you have a card in hand and you can't tell if it is fake or not and have to send it to some third party authenticator to determine that for you, you are in the wrong hobby.

Again, not calling anybody out and if I quoted you, don't take it personal. However, many of these comments were made by long time board members that should know the difference between a real and a fake.


I haven't read the referenced thread, but hoping this is somewhat of a rule-of-thumb statement and not rule-of-fact (or perhaps specific to the thread/poster). Otherwise there would never be any forgeries that get passed off as the real thing in any area, which goes against numerous forgeries that have fooled even the 'experts'.

[vintagetoppsguy]

but prince dying? i mean c'mon. seriously. it's freaking prince. and he's influenced every board member here one way or another even if you don't realize it.

Sorry, Bob, but grown male adults that dress in purple and have whiney feminine voices don't influence me. If you liked him, so be it. No knocking you - to each his own.

However, it belongs in the Watercooler section with all the other RIPs...like Glen Frey's RIP...someone that actually did influence me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Neil Young has a high voice too, surely you don't dislike him?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Neil Young has a high voice too, surely you don't dislike him?

Funny you mention that, Peter. I was having this exact conversation with someone at work this morning. I love music from that era, but no, I can't stand Young - specifically for his voice.

[begsu1013]

he may not have directly. but i guarantee you he influenced some other artist you like. again, "even if you don't realize it".

i'm a glen frey fan too. just don't play me hotel california.

quick question: are you an eric clapton fan?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Clapton? Yes.

[begsu1013]

of course you do:

[vintagetoppsguy]

No doubt he influenced other artists. But didn't Glenn Frey as well? It still belongs in the Watercooler/OT section with the rest of the RIP threads.

[begsu1013]

agreed.

glen frey does belong in the water cooler section and You Belong To The City. ;)

and i'm a fan.





edit: and the ironic thing, this whole thread about how stuff shouldn't be here has yet to produce any real talk about prewar cards.
and not many other threads popping either. as leon stated...he'd rather see something going on when it's stagnate than nothing.
if it was glowing w/ activity this thread wouldn't exist and the prince thread woulda been pushed down a long time ago.

[glchen]

... If you have a card in hand and you can't tell if it is fake or not and have to send it to some third party authenticator to determine that for you, you are in the wrong hobby.
...


Hi David, you might've been sarcastic when you stated the above, but I don't think that's totally fair. In prewar, there are so many different types of cards with different card stocks and printing methods. You almost need to specialize in a particular area to know whether it is truly authentic or not, even if you do have the card in hand. For example, T206 print anomalies, you might not know you have a true one unless you show it to mrvster, even if you have the card in hand. I once had a Butterfinger ad card, which I purchased from a long time and reputable dealer, which we bought thought were real until I sent it in for authentication and it was returned as fake (and which Leon confirmed since he owned authentic ones before). There is definitely more prewar knowledge that can be gained, so I am definitely in agreement with you there. However, the whole E90-1 thread, frankly, that card had all of the typical signs of being fake. It's definitely one of the exception cases.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Hello, Gary. I wasn't trying to be sarcastic but, as you made me realize, I may have been too harsh. You're right, not everyone can know everything about all different types of cards. I certainly don't. I wouldn't have any idea if I was holding a real Butterfinger or not. My comment was meant to be more in general with mainstream prewar cards, which really E90-1s are

[pokerplyr80]

The answer to your question is NO.

I read this thread this morning and didn't comment, but I thought the OP was being too uptight. I moved on to other threads. Then, I read the E90-1 Young thread in total disbelief.

Now, I am in agreement with the OP of this thread. He is spot on. How can anyone that knows anything about E90-1s look at that card and not know it's real? The OP is right. We do need more Pre-War threads, more Pre-War knowledge.

I'm not calling anyone out, so don't take it personal if I quoted you, but here are some of the comments in that thread about the Young:


very...very...BAD!

The color is washed out. The corners are uniformly rounded. It doesn't look like real E90-1 Young cards.

Note how different the background looks. Shadows etc.

and the "quaity" of the type in the name, team...the fake is different...look closely...not the right color either.

All bad, IMO. All exhibit similar corner wear....

obvious fakes

Here's the one that takes the cake about the Young card. "...no way I take this gamble. And I like to gamble. The payoff isn't high enough and it doesn't seem worth the shipping and grading fees to find out." If you have a card in hand and you can't tell if it is fake or not and have to send it to some third party authenticator to determine that for you, you are in the wrong hobby.

Again, not calling anybody out and if I quoted you, don't take it personal. However, many of these comments were made by long time board members that should know the difference between a real and a fake.

The OP of this thread is right - less OT threads and more Pre-War threads - especially when people can't tell the difference between a real or fake E90-1. And I've been guilty of participating in the OT main board threads too. Shame on me. It's just sad though when we (as a group), a Pre-War board, has regressed to the point that we can't tell the difference between a real and fake E90-1 Young, but we can tell you anything about Bryce Harper, Phil Rizzuto, Prince, etc. Again, I've been just as guilty. Shame on us.

I was the one who made the comment you mentioned. It's not just about telling if the card is fake or not, but if it's been altered and would receive a numerical grade. As PSA has been known to get it wrong, or have different results when submitting a card multiple times it is a valid concern. Even if the card is real it's still a gamble, and I stand by my assessment that with the information available to me at the time I made the comment it was not a gamble worth taking.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Based on the initial scan I don't think it was so obvious it was real. Particularly from a zero feedback seller with the old line about been in the family forever. But maybe I need to learn more about prewar. :) I will study up with Neil Young in the background.

[begsu1013]

dont be denied.

[mechanicalman]

FWIW, I'd rather read a thread about Prince than another one about Bryce Harper in the pre-war section.

[irv]

of course you do:

I personally never cared for Prince's music but there is no denying he was on multi talented individual.

I recently seen this vid and was blown away by how good of a guitar player he was. I had no idea truthfully. :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SFNW5F8K9Y

[steve_a]

I've been curious so seems like a place to ask.. What's the origin of the net54 name? Was it a 54 Topps board? Or started by a Gene Schott fan? Or something else altogether?

[irishdenny]

The answer to your question is NO.

I read this thread this morning and didn't comment, but I thought the OP was being too uptight. I moved on to other threads. Then, I read the E90-1 Young thread in total disbelief.

Now, I am in agreement with the OP of this thread. He is spot on. How can anyone that knows anything about E90-1s look at that card and not know it's real? The OP is right. We do need more Pre-War threads, more Pre-War knowledge.

I'm not calling anyone out, so don't take it personal if I quoted you, but here are some of the comments in that thread about the Young:


very...very...BAD!

The color is washed out. The corners are uniformly rounded. It doesn't look like real E90-1 Young cards.

Note how different the background looks. Shadows etc.

and the "quaity" of the type in the name, team...the fake is different...look closely...not the right color either.

All bad, IMO. All exhibit similar corner wear....

obvious fakes

Here's the one that takes the cake about the Young card. "...no way I take this gamble. And I like to gamble. The payoff isn't high enough and it doesn't seem worth the shipping and grading fees to find out." If you have a card in hand and you can't tell if it is fake or not and have to send it to some third party authenticator to determine that for you, you are in the wrong hobby.

Again, not calling anybody out and if I quoted you, don't take it personal. However, many of these comments were made by long time board members that should know the difference between a real and a fake.

The OP of this thread is right - less OT threads and more Pre-War threads - especially when people can't tell the difference between a real or fake E90-1. And I've been guilty of participating in the OT main board threads too. Shame on me. It's just sad though when we (as a group), a Pre-War board, has regressed to the point that we can't tell the difference between a real and fake E90-1 Young, but we can tell you anything about Bryce Harper, Phil Rizzuto, Prince, etc. Again, I've been just as guilty. Shame on us.

Hey There David!,

I Mention'd that the E90-1 and E95 Both Have the Same Papar Stock!
And THaT E90-1's Nevar Fray at the Ends Like this E90-1 Has...
So We Disagree!
I've Been Handling E90-1's & E95's fir the Last 4 years ... Diligently!
And I Always Start with The Papar Stock...

Okay... There's my BeginiN Reason Why I Think the Cards are Fake!
So, Tell Us Why You Think There Real!?
You Didn't Give any Reason(s) fir their Authenticity ...
Just Boast'd THaT They Are Real!

And Just ta Note...
You Didn't Call me Out ;)

[Leon]

The board used to be hosted by Network54.com .. This name is a derivative of that...
I've been curious so seems like a place to ask.. What's the origin of the net54 name? Was it a 54 Topps board? Or started by a Gene Schott fan? Or something else altogether?

[Lordstan]

I think some people perhaps are misinterpreting the OP's comments. I don't think he, or the others that agree with him, are saying that these threads and discussions are bad or not interesting. I think they are just commenting that they don't belong in the section of the board where Pre War card discussions go. The board has sections so that there some organization and grouping of like subjects. This allows people who are looking for a certain topic to know where they are likely to find that topic being discussed. I collect Lou Gehrig memorabilia and autographs and have no real interest in reading about 1948 Bowman or 1941 PlayBall, so am glad there is a memorabilia/auto section. I appreciate that I don't have to wade through posts that have no real interest to me. I know it wouldn't take a long time, but it's still nice to not have to do so.

Say RIP to Prince or other famous people who influenced our society in one way or another is definitely reasonable, but shouldn't it be in the Off Topic section? He was not a baseball player from before WW2. Not sure why it's so wrong to put the RIP thread in the correct place.

I appreciate Leon's looser style of governance, but can also understand that some might feel the balance of posts shifting and wish it weren't.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Who cares? If you want to read a topic read it if you don't don't. Not like moving a bunch of stuff off the main page is going to produce any more pre-war posts.

[coolshemp]

I always thought Pre-War referred to pre-WWI. The war to end all wars. How did that work out?

[Stonepony]

I personally never cared for Prince's music but there is no denying he was on multi talented individual.

I recently seen this vid and was blown away by how good of a guitar player he was. I had no idea truthfully. :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SFNW5F8K9Y

Supreme guitarist, yes!

[edjs]

I'm sorry, I felt this thread could use a couple more cards right about now. :)

Chive on!

[Kenny Cole]

Who cares? If you want to read a topic read it if you don't don't. Not like moving a bunch of stuff off the main page is going to produce any more pre-war posts.

+1. I so hate it when I agree with Peter. It makes me feel .... dirty. ;)

[vintagetoppsguy]

If you want to read a topic read it if you don't don't.

Then why have different sub forums? Let's just post everything on the main forum - B/S/T listings, Post War, Memorabilia, Autographs, etc. - and people can just sift through the threads and only read the topics they want to read?

[Beansballcardblog]

I can't even seem to get away from whining on sports cards message boards. <sigh>

First off, if you click on "Net54Baseball Homepage," it brings you to this forum. That pretty much assures that you will see random posts.

I have posted a thread in this forum that isn't "Pre War Baseball" and will continue to post in that thread. I'm not sorry about it at all. There wasn't a natural place for it. I posted it in this forum. It's gotten comments. I'm sorry you are being inconvenienced. The world isn't all unicorns and fields of daisies.

[Dewey]

I always thought prewar meant before the next war. They come so quickly.

[irishdenny]

I can't even seem to get away from whining on sports cards message boards. <sigh>

First off, if you click on "Net54Baseball Homepage," it brings you to this forum. That pretty much assures that you will see random posts.

I have posted a thread in this forum that isn't "Pre War Baseball" and will continue to post in that thread. I'm not sorry about it at all. There wasn't a natural place for it. I posted it in this forum. It's gotten comments. I'm sorry you are being inconvenienced. The world isn't all unicorns and fields of daisies.

Anarchy...

"And So iT BeGiNs...The Next Generation!" ;)

As Always my Friends...

[pokerplyr80]

Then why have different sub forums? Let's just post everything on the main forum - B/S/T listings, Post War, Memorabilia, Autographs, etc. - and people can just sift through the threads and only read the topics they want to read?

I don't really care but agree with this. I collect post war and visit that forum as well. Perhaps more members would check it as well as other sections if posts were made in the proper place.

[RCMcKenzie]

Nice T5's, Ed...Here's a Playball card which is obviously not pre WWII, but is in the spirit of this section...

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I don't really care but agree with this. I collect post war and visit that forum as well. Perhaps more members would check it as well as other sections if posts were made in the proper place.
I also collect post war and would like to see more posts in the post war forum. For me, that would be the primary motivation for keeping the forum contents separate. I read through the main/pre war forum often and enjoy the diversity the two eras offer.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[TUM301]

What`s the line from Stripes, you know, when Sgt. Hulka turns towards "psycho" and gives him his take ?

[T206Collector]

The answer to your question is NO.

I read this thread this morning and didn't comment, but I thought the OP was being too uptight. I moved on to other threads. Then, I read the E90-1 Young thread in total disbelief.

Now, I am in agreement with the OP of this thread. He is spot on. How can anyone that knows anything about E90-1s look at that card and not know it's real? The OP is right. We do need more Pre-War threads, more Pre-War knowledge.

I'm not calling anyone out, so don't take it personal if I quoted you, but here are some of the comments in that thread about the Young:


very...very...BAD!

The color is washed out. The corners are uniformly rounded. It doesn't look like real E90-1 Young cards.

Note how different the background looks. Shadows etc.

and the "quaity" of the type in the name, team...the fake is different...look closely...not the right color either.

All bad, IMO. All exhibit similar corner wear....

obvious fakes

Here's the one that takes the cake about the Young card. "...no way I take this gamble. And I like to gamble. The payoff isn't high enough and it doesn't seem worth the shipping and grading fees to find out." If you have a card in hand and you can't tell if it is fake or not and have to send it to some third party authenticator to determine that for you, you are in the wrong hobby.

Again, not calling anybody out and if I quoted you, don't take it personal. However, many of these comments were made by long time board members that should know the difference between a real and a fake.

The OP of this thread is right - less OT threads and more Pre-War threads - especially when people can't tell the difference between a real or fake E90-1. And I've been guilty of participating in the OT main board threads too. Shame on me. It's just sad though when we (as a group), a Pre-War board, has regressed to the point that we can't tell the difference between a real and fake E90-1 Young, but we can tell you anything about Bryce Harper, Phil Rizzuto, Prince, etc. Again, I've been just as guilty. Shame on us.

+1

I was equally surprised by the number of people convinced the card was fake. To me that was people making a decision about the cards based on a zero feedback seller and shoddy grammar in the listing. The photos of the cards was not ideal either but I don't think there were any red flags about authenticity.

[vintagesportscollector]

What`s the line from Stripes, you know, when Sgt. Hulka turns towards "psycho" and gives him his take ?

"Lighen up Francis"...funny, whenever I see or hear melodramatic whinning I think of that line.

That being said, while I don't really care, it would better to see threads kept in the right forum. Some topics however, even off topic, have a place in the "home" forum for all to see and share comments.

[buymycards]

If we are talking about pre WWII, do we mean when America entered the war in December of 1941 or when Hitler first got things started in Europe in the late 30's?

And if you live in Wisconsin like I do, everything IS unicorns and fields of daisy's.

Rick

[Mountaineer1999]

Things to do Saturday:
*Walk five miles
*Fill out Draftkings and fantasy lineups
*Mow the lawn
*Bump all non PreWar topics to top on Net54 PreWar forum

[Leon]

Things to do Saturday:
*Walk five miles
*Fill out Draftkings and fantasy lineups
*Mow the lawn
*Bump all non PreWar topics to top on Net54 PreWar forum

Things for a moderator to do on a Sarturday.

1. Nix ideas of anarchy :).
2. Go to kitchen and get more coffee.
3. Play with dogs.


.

[frankbmd]

Things for a moderator to do on a Sarturday.

1. Nix ideas of anarchy :).
2. Go to kitchen and get more coffee.
3. Play with dogs.


.

I would remind everyone that Leon only plays with post-war dogs, I think?

[Buythatcard]

Why don't we just have 1 forum for all cards. Just require the OP to place the year of the card in the title.

This way you can do an advanced search of the titles to find the year that you are interested in.

[Leon]

Why don't we just have 1 forum for all cards. Just require the OP to place the year of the card in the title.

This way you can do an advanced search of the titles to find the year that you are interested in.

No.

[Mountaineer1999]

Things for a moderator to do on a Sarturday.
1. Nix ideas of anarchy :).
.

We all have a tad of anarchist in us don't we? :)

I say just leave it as it is. It takes literal seconds to scroll down the topics and pick out a favorite to immerse yourself in :D

[vintagetoppsguy]

Why don't we just have 1 forum for all cards. Just require the OP to place the year of the card in the title.

This way you can do an advanced search of the titles to find the year that you are interested in.

Would never work and for the same reasons we complain about eBay searches. Somebody would search T206 or 1933 Goudey or whatever and ridiculous threads about reprints would appear in your search results.

[begsu1013]

things to do today:

1. laugh
2. realize ya cant please everyone
3. gonna have to please yourself
4. play some more neil young

[begsu1013]

mission accomplished.

[rats60]

of course you do:

http://www.snopes.com/eric-clapton-quote-about-prince/

This purported response is one Clapton is extremely unlikely to have made (in anything but jest), as it follows exactly the narrative of a decades-old (false) urban legend in which either Jimi Hendrix or Clapton himself supposedly answered the same question, in equally surprising fashion, by saying that it should instead have been posed to Phil Keaggy:

While Prince is regarded as a fine musician, he wasn't necessarily seen as being in the top echelon of world-class guitarists by his fellow axe men. Rolling Stones' 2003 list of the "Top 100 Guitarists of All Time" completely omitted him (although he was came in at #33 in a later version). Clapton and Hendrix, however, regularly rank at the top of the list.

[edjs]

Nice T5's, Ed...Here's a Playball card which is obviously not pre WWII, but is in the spirit of this section...

Thanks for noticing the T5s, I love these, especially Leach. Your Heilmann is really nice, he looks so sad, though. Is that what you meant by the spirit of this section? I was trying to provide something else to look at as people browse through all the dialogue. There are a few items shown, and I was looking at the frequency of posts:items, and it seemed time for more items. Derek's contribution of Jackies and Reds was spectacular (as are all the players shown in this thread). Anyways, I enjoy reading all the views/thoughts/opinions/OTs from all of you. It sure beats sitting around staring at the walls. As far as Prince goes, he played a whole bunch of instruments, but guess what? I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell!

[Peter_Spaeth]

http://www.snopes.com/eric-clapton-quote-about-prince/

This purported response is one Clapton is extremely unlikely to have made (in anything but jest), as it follows exactly the narrative of a decades-old (false) urban legend in which either Jimi Hendrix or Clapton himself supposedly answered the same question, in equally surprising fashion, by saying that it should instead have been posed to Phil Keaggy:

While Prince is regarded as a fine musician, he wasn't necessarily seen as being in the top echelon of world-class guitarists by his fellow axe men. Rolling Stones' 2003 list of the "Top 100 Guitarists of All Time" completely omitted him (although he was came in at #33 in a later version). Clapton and Hendrix, however, regularly rank at the top of the list.

Yeah you would think Clapton Page Richards Berry before you would think of Prince, I would anyhow. I saw some clips where his pyrotechnics were pretty awesome but greatness is more than that. 1 or 33 though a terrible shame that he died young.

[Leon]

mission accomplished.

After that go play some Joe Walsh, "There goes the neighborhood."

[Bosox Blair]

things to do today:


3. gonna have to please yourself



There are other forums/websites for that too.

Cheers,
Blair

[begsu1013]

joe walsh? now we are talking!!

ordinary average guy is so underated, imo.

been lucky enough to see him twice.

"it's hard to leave when you cant find the door"

and not 100% sure the clapton thing has been disproved yet. im sure we'll get something outta clapton in the next few days.

but this is him in his own words and pretty much the same point:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xhIwBNTQ5Yo

[the 'stache]

While Prince is regarded as a fine musician, he wasn't necessarily seen as being in the top echelon of world-class guitarists by his fellow axe men. Rolling Stones' 2003 list of the "Top 100 Guitarists of All Time" completely omitted him (although he was came in at #33 in a later version). Clapton and Hendrix, however, regularly rank at the top of the list.

Well, as somebody who has been playing the guitar for 25 years, studying a myriad of styles, and incorporating rock, prog, metal, blues, classical and jazz into my playing, I can say the Rolling Stone' Top 100 Guitarists of all-time list is shit. That they listed Kurt Cobain (#12) ahead of true virtuosos like Jeff Beck (#14), Brian May (#39), Ritchie Blackmore (#55), Eddie Van Halen (#70), David Gilmour (#82), and Randy Rhoads (#85), while completely excluding such greats as Al DiMeola, Allan Holdsworth, Pat Metheny, Andres Segovia, Joe Satriani, Stanley Jordan, Robert Cray, Adrian Belew, Eric Johnson, Joe Pass, Steve Rothery and John Petrucci....is laughable at best.

I've known a lot of guitarists, and not a one of them thought the Rolling Stone list was worth the paper it was printed on.

[Kenny Cole]

Well, as somebody who has been playing the guitar for 25 years, studying a myriad of styles, and incorporating rock, prog, metal, blues, classical and jazz into my playing, I can say the Rolling Stone' Top 100 Guitarists of all-time list is shit. That they listed Kurt Cobain (#12) ahead of true virtuosos like Jeff Beck (#14), Brian May (#39), Ritchie Blackmore (#55), Eddie Van Halen (#70), David Gilmour (#82), and Randy Rhoads (#85), while completely excluding such greats as Al DiMeola, Allan Holdsworth, Pat Metheny, Andres Segovia, Joe Satriani, Stanley Jordan, Robert Cray, Adrian Belew, Eric Johnson, Joe Pass, Steve Rothery and John Petrucci....is laughable at best.

I've known a lot of guitarists, and not a one of them thought the Rolling Stone list was worth the paper it was printed on.

I don't think any of those guys are pre-war guitarists. :)

[TUM301]

Pre -War Guitarist, Keith Richards ?

[Pat R]

Well, as somebody who has been playing the guitar for 25 years, studying a myriad of styles, and incorporating rock, prog, metal, blues, classical and jazz into my playing, I can say the Rolling Stone' Top 100 Guitarists of all-time list is shit. That they listed Kurt Cobain (#12) ahead of true virtuosos like Jeff Beck (#14), Brian May (#39), Ritchie Blackmore (#55), Eddie Van Halen (#70), David Gilmour (#82), and Randy Rhoads (#85), while completely excluding such greats as Al DiMeola, Allan Holdsworth, Pat Metheny, Andres Segovia, Joe Satriani, Stanley Jordan, Robert Cray, Adrian Belew, Eric Johnson, Joe Pass, Steve Rothery and John Petrucci....is laughable at best.

I've known a lot of guitarists, and not a one of them thought the Rolling Stone list was worth the paper it was printed on.

I agree with you Bill. A while back I was checking out the list to see where some members of the original Lynyrd Skynyrd band ranked (Steve Gaines, Allen Collins and Gary Rossington). I was shocked to see not one of them made the list and just as shocked with some of the people that did. I thought all three could/should have made the list. If there is a top ten list of the worst list's this one should be on it.

[rats60]

Well, as somebody who has been playing the guitar for 25 years, studying a myriad of styles, and incorporating rock, prog, metal, blues, classical and jazz into my playing, I can say the Rolling Stone' Top 100 Guitarists of all-time list is shit. That they listed Kurt Cobain (#12) ahead of true virtuosos like Jeff Beck (#14), Brian May (#39), Ritchie Blackmore (#55), Eddie Van Halen (#70), David Gilmour (#82), and Randy Rhoads (#85), while completely excluding such greats as Al DiMeola, Allan Holdsworth, Pat Metheny, Andres Segovia, Joe Satriani, Stanley Jordan, Robert Cray, Adrian Belew, Eric Johnson, Joe Pass, Steve Rothery and John Petrucci....is laughable at best.

I've known a lot of guitarists, and not a one of them thought the Rolling Stone list was worth the paper it was printed on.

You are referring to this list that didn't have Prince even listed and it is crap. The list with Prince at 33 has Cobain at 73 and all those guys you listed well ahead of him. Beck 5, Van Halen 8, Gilmour 14, May 26, Rhoads 36 and Blackmore 50.

That list is the opinions of other professional guitarists. The top 3 is pretty well established, Hendrix, Clapton, Page. The further you go down the list, the more subjective it becomes. The point still stands, while Prince was a great guitarist, he was no where near the best living guitarist.

[4815162342]

The irony of this thread is palpable.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't think any of those guys are pre-war guitarists. :)

I think the original RS list had Robert Johnson quite high. The revised one he dropped down.

[begsu1013]

les paul.

edit: and agreed, i'd rather have a roll of toilet paper than a rolling stone.

[begsu1013]

and speaking of rolling stone and it's corporate agendas...this is one of my fav clips.

derek trucks melting john mayer's face:

john mayer who? (https://youtu.be/SS0NHlWgi5w?t=199)


not sure if derek ever made RS lists. probably not, but that's more credible to me. i dig the under the radar guys like trucks, warren haynes, dave schools (bass), etc.

edit: in closing for prince, here is a link to his final show. kinda a slow show...it's primarily a panic site, but it has streams of live shows for just about anyone worth listening to along the right hand side.

just about anything found here (http://www.panicstream.net/vault/category/prince/)



back to prewar.

[frankbmd]

This thread coupled with the death of Prince Not Fielder may have the unintended consequence of proving that the number of prewar thread topics may be finite. If true, I feel like weeping.:eek::eek::eek:;)

So to paraphrase a baseball play, let's have a Net54 Pick Off contest.
For those of you with limited free time, watch and listen only to the last two
minutes of each of the following. The contestants are Prince and Clapton.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SFNW5F8K9Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rj4J6i_vw0w

Disclaimer: I have no knowledge or opinion on the top guitarists of all time, but I do have hearing loss.:mad::mad::mad::D

[begsu1013]

for ease, starting at last 2 minutes:

prince (https://youtu.be/6SFNW5F8K9Y?t=216)


clapton (https://youtu.be/rj4J6i_vw0w?t=251)


.

[Peter_Spaeth]

and speaking of rolling stone and it's corporate agendas...this is one of my fav clips.

derek trucks melting john mayer's face:

john mayer who? (https://youtu.be/SS0NHlWgi5w?t=199)


not sure if derek ever made RS lists. probably not, but that's more credible to me. i dig the under the radar guys like trucks, warren haynes, dave schools (bass), etc.

edit: in closing for prince, here is a link to his final show. kinda a slow show...it's primarily a panic site, but it has streams of live shows for just about anyone worth listening to along the right hand side.

just about anything found here (http://www.panicstream.net/vault/category/prince/)



back to prewar.

Derek is 16th.

[Eric72]

The irony of this thread is palpable.

I agree.

[begsu1013]

Derek is 16th.

wow! so they are only 90% sell-outs? that's nice.

[Peter_Spaeth]

wow! so they are only 90% sell-outs? that's nice.

The lists vary. Some are politically correct BS by critics but some I believe are chosen by actual musicians. The top 100 songs for instance changed really dramatically from one iteration to another.

[FourStrikes]

Pre -War Guitarist, Keith Richards ?

.