![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Gilbert Maines
My vote goes to the DeLong set. I just find the visual impact of a miniature baseball field with a comparitively much larger player positioned on it weird. No, it is worse than weird (whatever that is). |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dennis
the 1938 goudey are terrible.big heads on small body....stupid |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Sean Coe
1935 Goudey. After 1934 Goudey seem very uninspired. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: todd (nolemmings)
seems bound to rile whoever collects the set you find unappealing. I'll think about it as I type, but I damn sure would not choose the Delong set--that baby is one of the coolest sets ever put out, IMHO. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ben
And will add the R423 set to the list because you need telescopic sight to make out who the player is (they measure 5/8" by 7/8"). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: jay behrens
The M P & Co go to the top of the list. The ugliest set of cards ever produced. Most strip cards at least bear a slight resemblence to the player they are depicting. This set looks like they went to a kindergarten class and asked the kids to to draw the players. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bill Kasel
I bought a Plank for $50, and have had buyers remorse ever since. There isn't a true likeness in the bunch. Dull artwork too. Please don't be offended if you collect those. I just find them unappealing. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bob Marquette
I absolutely agree. The E91 set with its generic faces and cartoonish backgrounds is at the bottom of my list. It should be bounced from the E90-1 to E107 roll call of card sets. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: pete
I agree with the mp& co. and the 35 goudey and the e91's...generic cards stink!!!! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Rhett Yeakley
I tend to agree with Jay on this one with the MP and Co. cards, but there is a set that is even uglier. The hideous, the repulsive W565 set. It looks like a crazed kid got ahold of some old photos, some scissors, and a type-writer and went to town. Included is a scan of one of the cards with the Gehrig in the set, being even worse. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimB
The E91 set is boring with generic images. It holds no allure for me. I also agree that the 1935 Goudey set is uninspired. '33 Delong however, I have always liked though I do not currently own any (I did at one time). |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Todd (nolemmings)
probably tried to repress it--those W565s are hideous (at least there are very few in the "set") |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dan Koteles
the 38 goudeys as mentioned....absolutely ugly !!!! |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter
Please send me your virgin daughters...I mean send me your 38 goudeys...I'll gladly take them off your hands!!!! |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Billy
There isn't one pre-war set I wouldn't buy. As long as the populations are low enough, you are guaranteed to make money (which is my reason for buying them). |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
E91 fake poses. Yecch. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matthew Jackson
My apologies to anyone who collects these, but the W515 has my vote as the ugliest prewar set. The players look like villains from a Superman comic. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brian H (misunderestimated)
I'll echo on the sets where the cards have drawings that are generic and do not even attempt to resemble the subjects named on the card... this applies to the Buchner's from the 1880s as well as the Caramel set listed above. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: davidcycleback
The R423s are great in that you can fit like eight in a single top loader-- and none of the cards touch! Just be careful about which direction you cough or sneeze, or half your collection could dissapear. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kevin Cummings
Being a big fan of real photo type cards, drawn issues like the N284 Buchners have absolutely no appeal to me. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: brian p
E91 certainly is getting a bashing, and I think the reasons mentioned are not entirely justified. As I have written on this site previously, the set (at least most of the E91A and part of the E91B) has artwork that is based upon actual photos that can be seen in other card sets. Most of these depictions only correspond to the player's head and not the rest of the body. You may not like the stylistic leanings or the execution of this artwork, but to me it is a whole lot truer than most strip card depictions, and a heck of lot nicer to look at. If the stupid people at American Caramel had just stopped at the first series, these cards would probably have higher regard in the hobby, and not been stigmatized with the "generic" label. I have a completed article on this subject, which I was going to submit to the VCBC, but they stopped sending me the magazine a couple of issues ago (now everyone is in the same boat). Perhaps I should give Vintage Cardboard a try. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dan Koteles
Nice post Brian. P and Iam interested in e91 info ...to hell with the first amendmant |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
Ugliest of the strip cards |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Darren J. Duet
e91 |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Julie
pictures of real, individual players, are a drag, like the Buchner and the "Major League Die Cut" (1925, I think--Kit young is selling a bunch). |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jimi
Man, those '35s are ugly!!! Anyone here collect that set? I love my 34 Goudey set and 38 Goudey set (unique), and the 33 Goudey is not too shabby either.....but yikes, what happened in '35??? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred
If prewar is pre-Korean war: MP&Co cards, does this really need an explanation? |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Gilbert Maines
Well it is sure interesting that what some hate, others like. And I have to admit - I just started up a group of 1935 Goudeys, and can't wait for more! |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
Can anybody post an E91. I have never seen one. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Glen V
Just use the Old Cardboard link at the top of the posts to find different issues/pictures - here's the link to E91's: http://www.oldcardboard.com/e/e1/e091/e91.asp?cardsetID=728 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
As you wish .... |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anonymous
Thanks for the post |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nominations For Prewar Card Of The Year | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 28 | 12-15-2008 07:36 PM |
SCD - Prewar card freelancers | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 37 | 08-02-2007 03:42 PM |
Your Favorite Prewar Giant Card | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 33 | 05-01-2007 03:35 PM |
prewar set value increases, rank them? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 10-11-2006 09:50 PM |
Your first prewar card | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 68 | 05-25-2006 05:25 PM |