Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

PROMOS/SAMPLES/PREVIEWS/PROTOTYPES/PRE-PRODUCTIONS/TESTS

walt_altmen

Member
Aug 1, 2019
168
There are those iconic cards and then there are those that you just forget. I had to check to see if this was an alternate pose. After seeing that this was his issued card that year, I am struggling to remember ever seeing it. I know I did and I probably pulled 1 or more that year, but for the life of me, it doesn't register in my mind. I can picture the 78 and 80 Ryan's like they are tattooed on my brain, but not this one oddly enough.
Can you picture the '70 ryan image? 😉

6CDCFC38-B792-476E-AD9E-EE50AAD0A6AE.jpg
 

mrmopar

Member
Jan 19, 2010
3,789
really? cant tell if you're trolling or not bc i woulda pegged you for being a little more versed in this particular reggie 77 proof.

and it most certainly wasn't the image used in the '77 set.

by far one of the most coveted proofs on the planet per just about everybody.

eta:

https://www.robertedwardauctions.co...ltimore-orioles-unissued-proof-iconic-rarity/
Coveted, rare, popular or significant doesn't always translate to aesthetics. I personally don't care for the pose. I am familiar with the proof and not downplaying it's position in the hobby, but to me it is ugly.

As for the 70 Ryan, I think he has hands above his head, maybe mid waist up shot, but I wouldn't bet on it. I was more partial to Seaver and Palmer vs Ryan and Carlton for some reason as a kid.

Edit: Close enough on the pose to be satisfied with my memory.s-l640.jpg
 
Last edited:

walt_altmen

Member
Aug 1, 2019
168
Coveted, rare, popular or significant doesn't always translate to aesthetics to me.
fixed it for you bc w/o it youve made a very contradictory statement. "coveted, rare, popular or significant" does equate to aesthetics. there's even instances in which things are so ugly they end up being aesthetically coveted and/or significant.

and we'll just agree to disagree about you fully knowing the background on the proof because honestly, i don't think you did. had you known, you most likely woulda led off with "i know it's a rare proof" or "thank god they didn't use that in the '77 set" which by all accords you seem to know poses quite well, right? apparently you don't. the proof is in the proof. :eek:

in the future, i'd pick my words a little more carefully. you certainly wouldn't want people following you around, telling you that the cards you're posting are ugly, would you? even when, self admittedly, the majority of the card collecting world disagrees with you. (see your own quote)


but as far as the ryan and jackson proofs that you knocked, we get it. they aren't dodgers.

have a good one.
 
Last edited:

walt_altmen

Member
Aug 1, 2019
168
Coveted, rare, popular or significant doesn't always translate to aesthetics. I personally don't care for the pose. I am familiar with the proof and not downplaying it's position in the hobby, but to me it is ugly.

As for the 70 Ryan, I think he has hands above his head, maybe mid waist up shot, but I wouldn't bet on it. I was more partial to Seaver and Palmer vs Ryan and Carlton for some reason as a kid.
just quoting your full text where instead of just keeping your mouth shut, you just decide to call my cards ugly. then proceed to knock my players.
 
Last edited:

mrmopar

Member
Jan 19, 2010
3,789
just quoting your full text where instead of just keeping your mouth shut, you just decide to call my cards ugly. then proceed to knock my players.
You are being quite the baby here and I bet I missed an even better display, as I see you have edited everything. I am not knocking you or the players you collect. Quit reading into what I am saying and simply read the words.

Yay, you have a rare and expensive proof. Good for you. Is me thinking it is a boring (ugly) pose unacceptable to you? Must I love it because you do? No. We all collect a variety of different things, sometimes our interest cross, other times they do not. I don't care for the Jackson card, it does not stand out to me as anything special when I look at it just the same was the 1988 Score Jackson doesn't appeal to me. I would love to own it though (does that make your sore bottom feel better now?), if nothing more than to flip it for other cards that appeal to me more.
 

walt_altmen

Member
Aug 1, 2019
168
dont get it twisted. i grammatically edited. and apparently you missed my point. theres tons of stuff posted, like your entire dodger thread. i just dont feel the need to open my mouth if ive got nothing nice to say. you should try it is the point im driving home. you think it's ugly. great. yet you feel the need to say that?

and this most certainly isnt a monetary measurement contest, so dont try to take it there. clearly grasping straws.
 
Last edited:

mouschi

Featured Contributor, Bridging the Gap, Senior Mem
May 18, 2012
3,020
*Reads thread

*Checks header

Yup, says FCB and not Blowout. What in the name of 1988 Donruss is going on here?
 

walt_altmen

Member
Aug 1, 2019
168
*Reads thread

*Checks header

Yup, says FCB and not Blowout. What in the name of 1988 Donruss is going on here?
first, it's cardboard. not a big deal.

then just check out the dodger thread, then re-read.

(dodger post was after all this)
 
Last edited:

walt_altmen

Member
Aug 1, 2019
168
or long story short, for someone to call another's whale ugly, forgettable and the next years widely available issue much more pleasing is bush league. sure he's entitled to his opinion, feeling the need to state it is an entirely different issue.
 

gofrankgo

Member
Aug 11, 2008
295
2003 Donruss Team Heroes has a sample for all 530 cards. Given the estimated magazine print run, that means less than 50 Gold Samples for that set. As far as where they all are, look at them. Can you pick out a Samples from a base card without checking the back? I've found a few hiding, but they're out there hiding as regular base cards in sets and partial sets and team lots. Good luck!
Anyone have the Frank Thomas, card number 124, in the 2003 Donruss Team Heroes?
 

gofrankgo

Member
Aug 11, 2008
295
For sale ... (baseball) 1993 Triple Play UNMARKED promo. I have all players except #4 Eric Karros. Message me with a reasonable offer if interested. The base card is included for comparison.

1 Ken Griffey, Jr.
2 Roberto Alomar
3 Cal Ripken, Jr.
4 Eric Karros
5 Cecil Fielder
6 Gary Sheffield
7 Darren Daulton
8 Andy Van Slyke
9 Dennis Eckersley
10 Ryne Sandberg
11 Mark Grace
12 David Segui / Luis Polonia AA
 

thelesquad

Active member
Dec 6, 2008
1,264
For sale ... (baseball) 1993 Triple Play UNMARKED promo. I have all players except #4 Eric Karros. Message me with a reasonable offer if interested. The base card is included for comparison.

1 Ken Griffey, Jr.
2 Roberto Alomar
3 Cal Ripken, Jr.
4 Eric Karros
5 Cecil Fielder
6 Gary Sheffield
7 Darren Daulton
8 Andy Van Slyke
9 Dennis Eckersley
10 Ryne Sandberg
11 Mark Grace
12 David Segui / Luis Polonia AA
This is probably a long shot, but do you still have the Sandberg?
 

gofrankgo

Member
Aug 11, 2008
295
I may have posted this before but has anyone seen, or have, any baseball 1997 Score Franchise sample cards of Cal Ripken, Chipper Jones, Albert Belle or Roberto Alomar?
 

autocut

Active member
Let's see those promos!!! I have two Alex Rodriguez/Ken Griffey Jr./Randy Johnson/Jay Buhner 1998 Pinnacle Inside Stand-Up Guys Samples #4AB and 4CD and a Nolan Ryan 1993 Finest Promos #107 on the way that I'll post when they arrive.
Paper mock up and Fleer spelled his name wrong.
 

Attachments

Latest posts

Top