Share your contrarian hobby opinions

[CJinPA]

I believe the E92 dockmen are tougher to find in nice condition (PSA 5+) than people think.

[bnorth]

The T210 set is by far the best looking T set.

[Snapolit1]

T cards are boring.

[Belfast1933]

Great idea for a thread!

1953 Bowman cards…. Overrated Great pictures, but they don’t look like baseball cards to me.

[thatkidfromjerrymaguire]

1952 Bowman is a better set than 1952 Topps for these reasons:

1. Better artwork
2. Prices aren't inflated which makes it more collectible
3. Smaller set which makes it more collectible
4. Mays is a scarce high number but still more affordable than it's Topps counterpart, despite it's better image and lower population.
5. The Stan Musial card is one of the best looking baseball cards EVER (and Topps is lacking Musial)
6. The image on the 1952 Mantle makes me think of the Mona Lisa...while the double printed Topps Mantle is sort of ugly.

OK, I'll admit the omission of Jackie Robinson in Bowman is a pretty big downside...but overall Bowman is still better.


(OK, feel free to kick me off the boards for these opinions)

[jsfriedm]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

1952 Bowman is a better set than 1952 Topps for these reasons:

1. Better artwork
2. Prices aren't inflated which makes it more collectible
3. Smaller set which makes it more collectible
4. Mays is a scarce high number but still more affordable than it's Topps counterpart, despite it's better image and lower population.
5. The Stan Musial card is one of the best looking baseball cards EVER (and Topps is lacking Musial)
6. The image on the 1952 Mantle makes me think of the Mona Lisa...while the double printed Topps Mantle is sort of ugly.

OK, I'll admit the omission of Jackie Robinson in Bowman is a pretty big downside...but overall Bowman is still better.


(OK, feel free to kick me off the boards for these opinions)

+1. If only it had a Ted Williams and even, maybe, a DiMaggio.

[thatkidfromjerrymaguire]

Originally Posted by jsfriedm

+1. If only it had a Ted Williams and even, maybe, a DiMaggio.

Yes, since Bowman didn't appear to reuse any poses from prior years in 1952 (unlike some repeats from '50 to '51) it's fun to think what a new Ted Williams painting would have looked like. And yeah, a DiMaggio would have been amazing.

[NiceDocter]

Strip cards are awesome! Plus…. I don’t give a darn if they include a dotted line on the edge or not as long as they have some even borders…. And this includes Bazookas too! You are really going to pay 10x for a 9 vs an A just to see that dotted line???????

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

1952 Bowman is a better set than 1952 Topps for these reasons:

1. Better artwork
2. Prices aren't inflated which makes it more collectible
3. Smaller set which makes it more collectible
4. Mays is a scarce high number but still more affordable than it's Topps counterpart, despite it's better image and lower population.
5. The Stan Musial card is one of the best looking baseball cards EVER (and Topps is lacking Musial)
6. The image on the 1952 Mantle makes me think of the Mona Lisa...while the double printed Topps Mantle is sort of ugly.

OK, I'll admit the omission of Jackie Robinson in Bowman is a pretty big downside...but overall Bowman is still better.


(OK, feel free to kick me off the boards for these opinions)

Piggybacking on this, I think the 1952 Bowman is Willie Mays’ best card. The 1951 Bowman and 1952 Topps are too dark, the ‘53 Topps isn’t a nice image, and 1954 onward have too many cards printed.

[Lorewalker]

I do not see the appeal of any of the hugely popular T206 or 1933 Goudey cards.

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I do not see the appeal of any of the hugely popular T206 or 1933 Goudey cards.

I second this, which leads into mine,

Mine is that I prefer black and white cards, such as 1921/22 Caramel cards that contain actual photos of the player as opposed to the artwork type cards such as T206 and 1933 Goudey where the resemblance to the player is often sketchy.

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I do not see the appeal of any of the hugely popular T206 or 1933 Goudey cards.

You don’t see the appeal of cards of some of the games all time greatest players? What do you collect for them? Seems like a very strange statement.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

1952 Bowman is a better set than 1952 Topps for these reasons:

1. Better artwork
2. Prices aren't inflated which makes it more collectible
3. Smaller set which makes it more collectible
4. Mays is a scarce high number but still more affordable than it's Topps counterpart, despite it's better image and lower population.
5. The Stan Musial card is one of the best looking baseball cards EVER (and Topps is lacking Musial)
6. The image on the 1952 Mantle makes me think of the Mona Lisa...while the double printed Topps Mantle is sort of ugly.

OK, I'll admit the omission of Jackie Robinson in Bowman is a pretty big downside...but overall Bowman is still better.


(OK, feel free to kick me off the boards for these opinions)

I'll have my own contrarian opinions to add in due time, but in the meantime I agree with all of this.

[Yoda]

The only true way to determine a card's value at any one point in time is via auction.

[skelly423]

1950 Bowman is the best set of the decade, and it’s not especially close

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Yoda

The only true way to determine a card's value at any one point in time is via auction.

This is the biggest fallacy in the hobby. The value of an item is what a seller and a buyer can agree to. An auction values an item based on what the second highest bidder is willing to pay. There probably isn't much difference for generic items. For rare items with a limited collector base there is a huge difference.

[Leon]

I don't keep up with any major league (professional) sports.

and I think the E90-1 Jackson isn't good looking....
.

[thatkidfromjerrymaguire]

Originally Posted by Leon

I don't keep up with any major league (professional) sports.

.

Well, since we all collect cards of players who haven't played in YEARS, I don't see how current pro sports are even relevant

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

Well, since we all collect cards of players who haven't played in YEARS, I don't see how current pro sports are even relevant

+1 agree with every word.

[Snapolit1]

48 Leafs are probably the most beautiful set ever. And I think Andy Warhol ripped them off.

[jsfriedm]

Action shots/poses are better than portraits.

It's stranger to love simple pieces of cardboard from before your parents were born than shiny, high-tech cards of contemporary players.

[jamest206]

I try to collect other cards, comics, memorabilia, but always find myself going back to T206.

[jingram058]

I think t205 and 1953 Bowman color are the best looking baseball cards ever.

I think 1953 Topps and 1955 Bowman are the worst looking ever. In fact, I think1953 Topps is just effing hideous.

[joshleon]

Originally Posted by jingram058

I think t205 and 1953 Bowman color are the best looking baseball cards ever.

I think 1953 Topps and 1955 Bowman are the worst looking ever. In fact, I think1953 Topps is just effing hideous.

I think t205s are the 1953 Topps of tobacco cards.

Agree on both counts re: Bowman

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by CJinPA

I believe the E92 dockmen are tougher to find in nice condition (PSA 5+) than people think.

Agreed
_