Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Ugliest Set of All Time? (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=175566)

Cardboard Junkie 09-09-2013 07:52 PM

Ugliest Set of All Time?
 
We're talking about a "set" of baseball cards here.

My vote......1930 Baguer Chocolate set. Ugh.

ullmandds 09-09-2013 07:56 PM

eclipse...without a doubt!

Eric72 09-09-2013 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie (Post 1182650)
We're talking about a "set" of baseball cards here.

My vote......1930 Baguer Chocolate set. Ugh.

Pre-war only?

If so, my limited experience would have me leaning towards R337 (according the the Hager book, 1932 Anonymous.)

If not, I can think of some truly awful offerings during the '80s and '90's.

Best Regards,

Eric

yanksfan09 09-09-2013 08:11 PM

1935 R332 Schutter-Johnson has to be up there

Al C.risafulli 09-09-2013 08:39 PM

Eclipse beats M.P. & Co. by a hair.

-Al

Zach Wheat 09-09-2013 08:44 PM

Ugliest
 
W 517 s by a wide margin

Z wheat

esd10 09-09-2013 09:19 PM

really anything set made after 1979

pariah1107 09-09-2013 09:23 PM

Not even close, w9316's. An etch-a-sketch could depict more realism.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...ed=0CB4Q9QEwAg

Brian Van Horn 09-09-2013 09:23 PM

E91.

pitchernut 09-09-2013 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn (Post 1182706)
E91.

and T201

HRBAKER 09-09-2013 09:36 PM

MP & Co edging out R337

PolarBear 09-09-2013 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pariah1107 (Post 1182705)
Not even close, w9316's. An etch-a-sketch could depict more realism.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...ed=0CB4Q9QEwAg


Good gosh that's hideous.

SMPEP 09-09-2013 10:17 PM

In my opinion
 
M&P's and it ain't even close.

Not even real pictures of the player. Totally generic. and totally worthless (in my opinion!).

Cheers,
Patrick

T205 GB 09-10-2013 05:01 AM

T206's by far:D:D:D

t206blogcom 09-10-2013 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T205 GB (Post 1182775)
T206's by far:D:D:D

I think you meant T205's ;)

sportscardpete 09-10-2013 07:01 AM

t205's. I am not a fan of the borders. T207 are close too. N284 a distant third.

packs 09-10-2013 07:38 AM

My vote is half of the Mayo set. So many guys wearing suits and more lapels than uniforms.

ChiSoxFan 09-10-2013 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pariah1107 (Post 1182705)
Not even close, w9316's. An etch-a-sketch could depict more realism.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...ed=0CB4Q9QEwAg

From Old Cardboard: Considered by some to be the "ugliest" card set ever produced

http://www.oldcardboard.com/w/w9316/...?cardsetID=848

glynparson 09-10-2013 09:49 AM

1991 fleer
 
hated them since the day the came out.

pariah1107 09-10-2013 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiSoxFan (Post 1182847)
From Old Cardboard: Considered by some to be the "ugliest" card set ever produced

http://www.oldcardboard.com/w/w9316/...?cardsetID=848

I know ugly, I get to look at it every day in the mirror.:D

ElCabron 09-10-2013 10:43 AM

W9316 without question.

-Ryan

T206Collector 09-10-2013 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t206blogcom (Post 1182794)
I think you meant T205's ;)


+1 ...but without the smiley emoticon.

Leon 09-10-2013 10:55 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by NoizeBringer (Post 1182874)
W9316 without question.

-Ryan

If it's not THE ugliest it's certainly in the running. Here is my type of Baker from the set.

brianp-beme 09-10-2013 11:17 AM

W93ugly16
 
Just you wait people...I will get around to posting scans of my complete W9316 set with multiple duplicates. Scans so ugly you will be able to taste the ugliness, which is made even more offensive by some of my cards being in low condition.

'Ick' is correct,

Brian (E91's are not ugly, just misunderstood)

tbob 09-10-2013 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportscardpete (Post 1182804)
t205's. I am not a fan of the borders. T207 are close too. N284 a distant third.


:eek::eek::eek:

T205s? T207s? Really????? Both are beautiful sets. T207s in exmt or better are incredible!

JasonL 09-10-2013 12:32 PM

I just threw up in my mouth a little bit...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon (Post 1182878)
If it's not THE ugliest it's certainly in the running. Here is my type of Baker from the set.

ewww.....:eek:

PolarBear 09-10-2013 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon (Post 1182878)
If it's not THE ugliest it's certainly in the running. Here is my type of Baker from the set.


They need to call this the "Lipstick Set"

bigred1 09-10-2013 12:35 PM

After looking at them, those W9316s get my vote

auggiedoggy 09-10-2013 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PolarBear (Post 1182907)
They need to call this the "Lipstick Set"

Really, eh? The faces are just creepy looking. :eek:

ALR-bishop 09-10-2013 12:43 PM

W515 or 1923 Fleer
 
My personal pick

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...539/img075.jpg
http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...pse8c50ac4.jpg

iwantitiwinit 09-10-2013 12:56 PM

1969 Topps nuff said.

RobertGT 09-10-2013 01:04 PM

1951 Berk Ross.

A disgraceful excuse for a baseball card.

the 'stache 09-10-2013 01:12 PM

Al, I have to agree. If we're talking pre-war or vintage, the W515 gets my vote. Too bad, because there's some really great players available in it.

Of course, even that looks beautiful compared to some of the uninspired stuff that came out in the early 90s. Obnoxious, loud colors were all over the place. Thankfully, I'd stopped collecting by then.

arc2q 09-10-2013 02:17 PM

I think for pre-war the strip card sets W515, W551, etc. are pretty bad. They look like they were drawn by a child -- the likeness is questionable on some of them. Top that off with the fact that many are blank back and were actually cut by children.

Worst set of all time, though, has to be the yellow 1990 Score. Oh wait, the 1981 Fleer was pretty awful with the out-of-focus photographs.

kmac32 09-10-2013 02:45 PM

1962 Topps are not very attractive for postwar and not a fan of Ramly T204 cards from 1909

deadballfreaK 09-10-2013 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop (Post 1182911)

That Cobb is just creepy.

PolarBear 09-10-2013 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadballfreaK (Post 1183100)
That Cobb is just creepy.


https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/i...4Z6QMqGmMcxEIF

brianp-beme 09-10-2013 09:33 PM

W9316's are for the non-picky
 
2 Attachment(s)
As promised, here are scans of my set, and then cards that I have multiples. As can be seen, this issue comes with a lot of color and design variations (eat your heart out T206 freak lovers!).

I especially like the squiggly background lines variations on the Veach and Cadore...it makes these players seem incredibly psychotic. And the Griffith card always reminded me of Malcolm McDowell in A Clockwork Orange.

Although I concede that the W9316 set is at or near the top of the ugly list, I still can't resist them. I must have absolutely no taste.

Brian

pariah1107 09-10-2013 09:44 PM

Those are some fugly cards! :eek:

Talk about lipstick on a pig.

robw1959 09-10-2013 10:03 PM

1969 Topps
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iwantitiwinit (Post 1182917)
1969 Topps nuff said.

Really? The 1969 Topps issue is my favorite set from the '60s. Gorgeous set, in my opinion of course.

deadballfreaK 09-10-2013 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robw1959 (Post 1183179)
Really? The 1969 Topps issue is my favorite set from the '60s. Gorgeous set, in my opinion of course.

Not my favorite, but I think 69 Topps is a damn good set.

Cardboard Junkie 09-10-2013 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianp-beme (Post 1183169)
As promised, here are scans of my set, and then cards that I have multiples. As can be seen, this issue comes with a lot of color and design variations (eat your heart out T206 freak lovers!).

I especially like the squiggly background lines variations on the Veach and Cadore...it makes these players seem incredibly psychotic. And the Griffith card always reminded me of Malcolm McLaren in A Clockwork Orange.

Although I concede that the W9316 set is at or near the top of the ugly list, I still can't resist them. I must have absolutely no taste.

Brian

It might have been Malcolm McDowell?

brianp-beme 09-10-2013 10:55 PM

Malcolm Somethingorother
 
David, in an alternate world it would be Malcolm McClaren, but I guess in this world it will have to be Malcolm McDowell. Thanks for pointing out my otherworldliness.

Brian

bcornell 09-10-2013 11:00 PM

You guys just insulted 70% of Dan Mckee's usernames.

I'm going with T213's. They're like T206's, but with mildew, bad ink, and no imagination.


Bill

deadballfreaK 09-10-2013 11:44 PM

http://i1278.photobucket.com/albums/...ps8966c36e.jpg

I think I just found an unknown strip card.

Vintagecatcher 09-11-2013 03:22 AM

E99 & E100 Bishop's Candy
 
1 Attachment(s)
Not a fan of the E99 & E100 Bishop's Candy sets.

The floating heads are just plain strange, and this card of Hap Hogan reminds me of Porky Pig.

Patrick

Zach Wheat 09-11-2013 05:54 AM

Ugliest
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vintagecatcher (Post 1183210)
Not a fan of the E99 & E100 Bishop's Candy sets.

The floating heads are just plain strange, and this card of Hap Hogan reminds me of Porky Pig.

Patrick

I have to agree about the Porky the Pig comment...wow.

Z Wheat

ALR-bishop 09-11-2013 08:33 AM

Ugly
 
My honorable mention

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...g?t=1378823516

novakjr 09-11-2013 08:48 AM

I was gonna agree with the MP & Co. But in order to do so, I would have to consider both the '43s the '49s. The way they just recycled the cartoons and swapped out names, which resulted in a Bob Lemon card with Chicago on the jersey, and also depicted Larry Doby as a white guy... The insane inaccuracy in regards to even the simplest of details, not only adds to their ugliness, but also their charm. I've always thought it to be a horrible, yet extremely loveable set.

Those w9316's are atrocious though. I may actually go with those as being worse.. I almost see nothing to like about them. Well, aside from being baseball cards..

ullmandds 09-11-2013 08:52 AM

1 Attachment(s)
I vote for this/these?!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:02 AM.