ugliest and boring pre war issues

[zljones]

What do you think are some ugly pre WWII cards? I for one think just about every card made from 1916-1932 as ugly issues or boring, like those exhibits and strip cards. Goudey Wide pens are also ugly and boring.

[Leon]

Some of the cards in the 1916-1932 era are neat.....Beauty is in the eye of the beholder though. I will admit some of them are ugly too, such as a few of the 1920's W cards and a few of the R cards, though most of those are a few years later.....but again, some of that era are so butt ugly they are almost attractive because of it.

How can anyone who collects vintage not like this D381?

[dstraate]

Well, if we're talking ugly, Honus Wagner might not be the face to show if you're trying to convince someone otherwise.

Good thing he could crush a baseball, cause I don't think he was going to become a male model.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by dstraate

Well, if we're talking ugly, Honus Wagner might not be the face to show if you're trying to convince someone otherwise.

Good thing he could crush a baseball, cause I don't think he was going to become a male model.

he's not George Clooney but it's a neat baseball card.

[zljones]

I am in love with lithograph beauties so much that I just can't find anything special about black and white cards accept for N172, N173, N175, N300 and E107 which I am in awe of. Leon you are right on, beauty is in the eye of beholder. Cards like E107 or N300 could be defined as bland but they are loaded with history and rarity it makes them beautiful to me. I just do not have any interest in 1916-1932 cards, so that makes them ugly and dull to me, but to someone else they are as good as gold. I am also exclusively into the main mass produced sets and there were none from 1916-1932.

[packs]

I've always disliked the 1888 SF Hess Newsboys cards. Someone just paid $488 for an SGC 20 on eBay. Sure, they're pretty neat looking cards but I can't imagine paying nearly $500 for a card of a guy who played on his company's baseball team.

[vintagecpa]

I personally never got anything out of strip cards. I guess they would get my vote.

[bcbgcbrcb]

I think that the exhibit cards are great.

I believe that T207's fall into that category, not very colorful, not great assortment of stars, etc.

Many of the strip card issues would also fall into that category but there are a couple of nice ones, W590 & W504 come to mind.

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Leon

he's not George Clooney but it's a neat baseball card.

Wagner, Collins, Jackson -- these guys were like Nixon in the 1960 debates.

[steve B]

It's hard to pick any prewar cards as boring. The big black and white cards, the goudey fine pens and that sort don't do much for me.

But I like stuff with fairly primitive art or printing as much as the really nice litho stuff, so lots of cards fit. I even like the MP Co cards.

Steve B

[Robextend]

I don't like the strip cards at all, although I know many people do.

Also, I know the E91 series isn't pretty, but I love collecting it!

[ValKehl]

I, for one, really like the b & w, real-photo cards much more than the colorful, artist-rendition cards. If I were a set collector, my top focus would be on the M101-4/5 set (I also love the different ad backs of this set). So many of the deadball-era stars are in this set!
Val

[Brian Van Horn]

Ugly? Most W-cards in my opinion. The exceptions being W502, W503, W504 and W590 as well as 1915 Unc (both versions).

On another level, the E91 sets I consider the doll collection. They don't look like the players. They are just dolls in baseball uniforms.

[zljones]

[QUOTE=Brian Van Horn;956131]Ugly? Most W-cards in my opinion. The exceptions being W502, W503, W504 and W590 as well as 1915 Unc (both versions).

On another level, the E91 sets I consider the doll collection. They don't look like the players. They are just dolls in baseball uniforms.[/QUOT

Indeed they do look like dolls, that is a great comparison.

[ScottFandango]

Poor art and detail
Small stature
Poor condition
Thus

Cheap prices

[kcohen]

I can't think of any pre-war issue that I find ugly is the way Topps cards in the 70s became, but mind-numbingly boring, off the top of my head: Maple Crispettes, the ice creams (Yuengling, Tharps, Harrington), York Caramels

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by kcohen

I can't think of any pre-war issue that I find ugly is the way Topps cards in the 70s became, but mind-numbingly boring, off the top of my head: Maple Crispettes, the ice creams (Yuengling, Tharps, Harrington), York Caramels

I'm with you on other issues aside from Maple Crispette. Outstanding player selection, great portraits and interesting background text. I pretty much don't like any "W" issues, "generic" sets, the humanoid illustrations of T207 AND *gasp* the incredibly overrated T206 set. I guess after handling 300 trillion of them the appeal wears off. Heck, I think they even found some on the moon.

[iggyman]

Glad you asked! Hangs down, actually it's not even close, the ugliest set of all-time has got to be the W517! This set is down-right repulsive!!! Makes me puke! Who in their right mind would ever commission a set like this???

picture99 619.jpg

What an awful set. First of all it's not a lithograph, nor was it ever inserted into a tobacco product. Then to make matters worse, a dreadful dull ho-hum strip set. Yeah, I'm falling asleep as well. Okay, so the W517 is chuck full of nuts loaded with hall of famers. So what of it.............just because Bo Derek got the leading role in a movie, that never made her a ten.

picture99 620.jpg

Yeah it's got variations, but have you seen the print quality??? Disgusting, distressing, and mostly dreadful!

picture99 621.jpg

Sure, it comes in a rainbow of colors (purple, red, b&w, sepia, etc) but now I'm beginning to insult your intelligence. Didn't we already learn that colors will fade!

picture99 622.jpgpicture99 624.jpg

Thank you thread starter and moderator dude for letting me vent. I actually feel much better and in a small way I'm now a better person. So if you should ever see an unsightly W517 on eBay, don't even bother to take a peek, your money will be better spent on a Sammy Sosa RC.

Lovely Day...

[ValKehl]

Hi Ken - I note that you did not include the 1928 Sweetman cards as being boring. Am I to assume then that you really like these?
Val

[familytoad]

Ig, my old pal...
You convinced me, I will not collect the W517 cards.
Now, i may pick up a HOFer or two, but I promise to only get the guys who have been panned as not worthy HOFers. You know that set has several of the 30's players who should have never been HOFers (so I have heard) and the set itself is ugly and boring.
And my York Caramels are ugly too ...although I think I will hang onto them, just so no one else has to suffer with them.

Whew...that was close

[zljones]

Gee wow some defensivness I am detecting about collectors like myself not liking 1916-1932 era cards because they are dull. I did not think I would be thought of as less intelligent because I do not collect from this era or find them interesting. I do not see how INTELLIGENCE plays into having a preferrence in what kind of cards one collects.

[zljones]

So I should just collect Sammy Sosa Rookie cards because I do not prefer to collect this era of cards that do not interest me, how does that happen?? What does Sammy Sosa have to do with vintage? Gee I must be DUMB because I do not prefer to collect from this era and I wanted to see if anyone felt the same way as me, wow that makes me STUPID.
Stupid me needs colors to make me happy I guess. I guess appreciating the fine art of litograph over a BW photgraph makes me dumber, wow that sucks, I think I need to grow a bigger brain now.

[ScottFandango]

I guess you didn't like IGGY's wisenheimer response...


Sepia toned cards? Good for colorblind dogs...

Photo cards are so boring, no originality


The Real cards are Half-tone color lithographs, otherwise known as ARTWORK.

An example of real art :

[iggyman]

Originally Posted by ScottFandango

I guess you didn't like IGGY's wisenheimer response...

As per urban dictionary:
Wisenheimer: Someone always making feeble wisecracks, who laughs at his/her own jokes and is generally deserving of severe and painful punishment.
That guy is up there thinking we are all listening to his puerile crap, such a wisenheimer.


Yikes! I thinks I would prefer to have my intelligence questioned . Okay, truth be told, that definition fits me to a tee.

Zach, please don't take it so personally. I was just having some fun, nothing more. In hindsight, perhaps it was at your expense, but I also kinda' mentioned Leon so you wouldn't feel so lonely. Plus, there is nothing wrong with drumming-up interest in W517's, just in case you see them on the B/S/T page (NOT!).

In all seriousness your thread is spot-on. Come on man, nobody could ever have any qualms with it, your premise is painfully accurate. There are a bunch of really ugly sets from the 1916-1932 era, which is a darn shame but is the obvious truth. If I must confess, I really really really think that those cartoonish "Big Head" strips that Leon collects are unpleasant to look at and whenever I see one they make me a little bit queezy.

Lovely Day...

[aelefson]

These are on the ugly side, and worse they are generic. At least other ugly issues have player names attached.
Alan

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by zljones

Gee wow some defensivness I am detecting about collectors like myself not liking 1916-1932 era cards because they are dull. I did not think I would be thought of as less intelligent because I do not collect from this era or find them interesting. I do not see how INTELLIGENCE plays into having a preferrence in what kind of cards one collects.

You had to expect a little grief with your original post. You talk about the cards some of us collect as being ugly & dull and then you even go as far as to say that there are some b&w you can stand because they have "history" (implying somehow that 1916-1932 doesn't have that going for it--- when in reality that period is almost without rival as the most exciting and historic of all time periods in baseball history as it basically is babe Ruth's entire career and the period of transition from the dead ball era to the modern live ball era). In reality I think people were very well behaved.

[zljones]

Originally Posted by iggyman

As per urban dictionary:
Wisenheimer: Someone always making feeble wisecracks, who laughs at his/her own jokes and is generally deserving of severe and painful punishment.
That guy is up there thinking we are all listening to his puerile crap, such a wisenheimer.


Yikes! I thinks I would prefer to have my intelligence questioned . Okay, truth be told, that definition fits me to a tee.

Zach, please don't take it so personally. I was just having some fun, nothing more. In hindsight, perhaps it was at your expense, but I also kinda' mentioned Leon so you wouldn't feel so lonely. Plus, there is nothing wrong with drumming-up interest in W517's, just in case you see them on the B/S/T page (NOT!).

In all seriousness your thread is spot-on. Come on man, nobody could ever have any qualms with it, your premise is painfully accurate. There are a bunch of really ugly sets from the 1916-1932 era, which is a darn shame but is the obvious truth. If I must confess, I really really really think that those cartoonish "Big Head" strips that Leon collects are unpleasant to look at and whenever I see one they make me a little bit queezy.

Lovely Day...

Oh lol I feel dumb now. Sometimes it's hard for me to pick up on humor, so I missed the boat here Iggy. Plus it did not help for me to come on late on saturday night from my friend's house . I should stay off commenting on saturday nights late, the cocktails loosen the tongue (or keyboard typing). It's all good I am too new here so I need to get to know everybody still.

[Orions father]

My entire collection falls into that time frame. I agree strip cards are ugly but Exhibits are great. Ok maybe Mr Fewster is not the best example.