There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>identify7</b><p>For example: the posed cards in e107, such as the Matty and Wagner; as well as many other costly cards. The reason which I do not like them is because the depiction does not capture the intensity, the competitiveness, nor the confidence and resolve of the accomplished athletes.<br /><br />But these cards are not ugly.<br /><br />The long thread on the Leaf Paige brought the subject of ugly cards to mind. Which cards have you encountered that are uglier than the Leaf Paige?

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>AParks</b><p><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/ap13/e102sgraded/websize/dotsfldg_sgc50.JPG"><img src="http://images.collectors.com/Articles/1938dimaggio_300.jpg">

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>identify7</b><p>The DiMaggio chokes, and Miller "hit it to my left" cards! Hahahaa. I love 'em!

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>drdduet</b><p>E90-1 joe jackson

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Bruce Babcock</b><p>I actually like the Miller "big glove." Some of the ugliest cards, while not so vintage, are some of the Topps issue cards depicting players without caps, or caps with the team logo "erased."

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Al Crisafulli</b><p>Hey! <br /><br />I LOVE that DiMaggio card!<br /><br />-Al

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Shannon</b><p>I really like that Dots Miller card. First time I have seen one. Very nice.

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>dstudeba</b><p>I too have always like the Miller card.<br /><br />I always thought the T206 Young portrait made him look like the the kid on "King of the Hill"<br /><br />Many of Mays' cards are not flattering.

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Andrew Parks</b><p><img src="http://www.gfg.com/baseball/jjlarge.jpg">

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Bob Rousseau</b><p>yeah- I'm another one who likes the Dots Miller card. I'm a sucker for those ones with the orange skies (as in other caramels and Obaks)

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Bruce Babcock</b><p>I forgot about the "Red Lips" Joe Jackson. Not a good looking card in my book.

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>whycough</b><p>The '38 Goudey Joe D is his best card and aesthetically one of the great cards in the hobby. This example is missing the excessive toning which usually plaques this issue. I have been looking for a nice one of these for a long time. Any card computer generated is a horror.

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Kevin Cummings</b><p>The N300 Mayo cards of Delahanty, Hamilton and Robinson in their street clothes. It makes them look like bankers or bandleaders, not ballplayers.

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I love that DiMaggio too. Wish I owned one.<br />JimB

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Julie Vognar</b><p>E 90-1 Jackson and the Cracker Jack Jackson!<br /><br />I hate that red bit in the E 90-1 that's sometimes on his lips and sometimes a mustache, and I think the Cracker Jack looks like a wooden doll!<br /><br />Boston Store..now that is one gorgeous Jackson...<br /><br />You know, if we didn't disagree on what was attractive and what wasn't, we'd be continually fighting over a few cards!

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Chris Counts</b><p>I agree with anyone who thinks the 1938 Goudey Heads-Ups are ugly. Other sets that make my hall of shame for bad card design are as follows ...<br /><br />1) E-91s — While I like many of the Caramel card designs, the E-91s, in my opinion, have truly awful artwork;<br /><br />2) R312s — I generally like color-tinted photos, but why does just about every player in this Goudey set look like he's wearing lipstick? For me, the lipstick factor ruins many Caramel cards as well;<br /><br />3) 1948 Leaf — I realize they're post-war, but since they've already been mentioned, I'll toss in my two cents ... I actually think the Paige is one of the nicer cards. They generally have bad colors, bad artwork and they're printed on bad paper.<br /><br />4) Any Goudey card that's not from 1933 or 1934 — For me, it's all downhill after the wonderful "Big League Gum" set. I don't mind the '34s, but to me, the '35s and '36s look like they were created as almost an afterthought. The same goes for the Wide Pen premiums, the '39s (I can't stand uniforms and caps with the logos whited out) and '41s (not a bad design, but poorly executed on bad paper with some of the worst miscuts I've ever seen. In contrast, I like just about everything Goudey's chief competitor, National Chicle, ever created.<br /><br />There are others cards that make me cringe, like strip cards for instance, but I'm going to stop now or I'll have nightmares. I'm going to go look at my '53 Bowmans now just to clear my head ...<br /><br /><br />

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Roy</b><p>I dislike the 72 Topps mainly because of the Texas Rangers cards. The logos are erased from caps and many of the photos were shot from a low angle looking up into the players' noses. Thus, the term "Nose" cards.

There are many rather expensive cards which I do not like.
 

Posted By: <b>Dennis W.</b><p>Several strip cards are really ugly, especially the W512s. The more expensive ones like the Ruth and Cobb are just terrible.