POLL: What is the last year for vintage baseball?

Buccaneer

I vote for 1972 (or more accurately, the 1970-1972 selection). There are a couple of reasons why but no need to hear my opinions.

softparade

1987-??? (in case you think everyone here is an old fogey)

Stingray

What do you consider to be an "old fogey"?

Stingray

iamthegreatcornholio

I vote somewhere around 1969-1973 as the last.

Brian

softparade

Steve, I always wondered what an issues production level had to do with the card being "vintage" What if Goudey's were super over produced way back when? Really, lets just say they were. Would a 1933 Goudey card be labled "modern" right now? Just becauce of a huge mistake, the printing press went haywire.

Dan

Buccaneer

Dan, you are talking about one set. I am referring to a fundamental change in the market when EVERYTHING became so easy to get that we will never, ever recover from that (i.e., those years will always be in high supply). I was working at a card store and had been following the controversies regarding the relative scarcities of some of the 1984-1986 issues. When the order forms came in for 1987 and esp 1988, it was like the floodgates opened and stayed opened.

WinPitcher

cards from before WW2 get my vote


some claim true vintage cards are before 1920


others have even different opinions...............

Steve

softparade

Steve, I hear you about the mid to late 80's glut. I was just throwing out the thought that is always in my head when this question comes up.

Dan

Stone193

On the vintage scene:

My son told me about 6 yrs ago that he was getting interested vintage records....I said..."you mean
78's?" He said..."No records from the 80s"

I think he was totally clueless what I meant - how's this for relative vintage!

I'll bet there are some young guys out here who do not even get the 78 reference.

Mike

Stingray

Looks like there must be a younger crowd here. The 76-79 is winning. I voted for 67-69.

Stingray

WinPitcher

methinks the question could have been "when do you feel modern era begins"

steve

lol mike i can remm as a kid flinging tons of 78 rpm records against the side of a rock wall at the town dump.

I have prolly 100 or so in my collection though.

Stone193

<< <i>I have prolly 100 or so in my collection though. >>


Any Al Jolson?

stown

Personally, I think vintage ends in 1959 because the 60's were known for the hippies

stevek

My opinion is 1973 is the last year for vintage baseball cards because it was the last year that Topps issued cards by series. But "vintage" is in the mind of the beholder.

WinPitcher

Any Al Jolson?


yup

phreakydancin

Anyone think there needs to be a category in between "vintage" and "modern"?

I have a tough time thinking of 30 year old cards as modern. In 1975 there was still one card producer in the marketplace, and cards were still the same dimensions as they were in 1957. The only real difference is the size of the the production run.

softparade

<< <i>Anyone think there needs to be a category in between "vintage" and "modern"?

I have a tough time thinking of 30 year old cards as modern. In 1975 there was still one card producer in the marketplace, and cards were still the same dimensions as they were in 1957. The only real difference is the size of the the production run. >>



phreak .... RIGHT!

Buccaneer

phreak, I agree with you on a "transition" era. That was why I worded the poll like I did: the beginning of modern does not necessarily start at the end of vintage.

However, don't start pulling this "30 years old" stuff. That is a huge pet peeve of mine in thinking that cards that are X yrs old (usually 15-30) must be "worth" something. I have 150 yr old newspapers and books that aren't worth diddly and cards that are about 20 yrs old are worthless garbage (softy, you knew I would get that in ) and will always be.

softparade

<< <i>phreak, I agree with you on a "transition" era. That was why I worded the poll like I did: the beginning of modern does not necessarily start at the end of vintage.

However, don't start pulling this "30 years old" stuff. That is a huge pet peeve of mine in thinking that cards that are X yrs old (usually 15-30) must be "worth" something. I have 150 yr old newspapers and books that aren't worth diddly and cards that are about 20 yrs old are worthless garbage (softy, you knew I would get that in ) and will always be. >>



Steve, my big pet peeve is that a card HAS to be worth something to be considered "vintage" If this is the case then this hobby better stop using the word "vinatge" Your newspaper is vintage REGARDLESS of what it is worth. The idea that cards have to be worth something or scarce to be vintage is just stupid!

"vintage" has more to do with AGE than it does WORTH. I have to agree with phreak ....

calleocho

Steve this a good post!

I really like the way that comic book collectors divide time periods.

Gold, silver and bronze.

But since baseball cards are older i would add platinum

1860's-1911= platinum

1919-1941= golden

1951-1973=bronze

1974-now =aluminum

there are some gaps that i just could not fill...i started with the early carte de viste(sp) until 1911 when the t-206 series ended.

then the end of WW I until the US entered WWII

then when Topps started until 1973 when they stopped issuing sets in series.

then all modern

TNP777

<< <i>On the vintage scene:

My son told me about 6 yrs ago that he was getting interested vintage records....I said..."you mean
78's?" He said..."No records from the 80s"

I think he was totally clueless what I meant - how's this for relative vintage!

I'll bet there are some young guys out here who do not even get the 78 reference.

Mike >>



I remember my dad having boxes upon boxes of 78s. I also remember when we lived in this house (mid-70s) that overlooked a decent sized hill and him flinging some of them as far as they'd go. Nice frisbees I guess, but I gotta think that he chucked a good chunk of money down that hill.

Geordie

Buccaneer

Dan, if I may get philosophical again, the term “worth” has many meanings and as I will get into below, so does “vintage”. How much something is “worth” – whether it has intrinsic value or not – has generally defined by the market or more broadly, by society. This does not speak to personal or sentimental “worth” because that is not measurable. Additionally, things may have been “worth” something at one time but for myriad of reasons, they are not anymore. Just take a look at the cars in the junkyard, or buildings or home that have been demolished, or electronic goods that have become obsolete. Age has nothing to do with it because anything old or new can be replaced or eliminated. My first point is that as something ages, it does not imply that it increases or even maintains value – it may or may not.

Regarding the semantics of “vintage”, age is one definition but there are two general thoughts to what makes something “vintage”. First is that it becomes a moving target. In other words, something that was new now becomes old. The second is more prevalent in society, I believe, and that is in hindsight, we have defined and labeled the time period something belongs in. This is true for music and architecture where “modern” is a time period that does not change and anything newer just gets labeled with another term (e.g., “post-modern”). Again, just because something is of an earlier time period does not imply “value” or “worth” beyond the personal or sentimental. The society’s overall value or the market value of something that is not new may or may not have “worth” and the same generally goes with collectables of any kind. Throughout history, society has generally put more value on things that are of quality and of a certain scarcity – but not one without the other. It’s never a smooth progression of time periods – from more value as you go back in time to less value as you get closer to now. If a time period breaks down as A-B-C-D, B may be more popular than D but D is much more popular than C. A may or may not be cared about at all (you see this in sports, arts and coins).

When I brought up a transition period earlier in alluding to something more than just a simple two-period breakdown, here was what I had in mind:

The period after “vintage” is MODERN…but that period has ended (around 1992) and were are now in the POST-MODERN period. Of course one can break it down further (like the comics example) but most speak of a duality in cards whereas I believe it goes one step further.

I know this makes little sense, I just like to ramble.

phreakydancin

<< <i>phreak, I agree with you on a "transition" era. That was why I worded the poll like I did: the beginning of modern does not necessarily start at the end of vintage.

However, don't start pulling this "30 years old" stuff. That is a huge pet peeve of mine in thinking that cards that are X yrs old (usually 15-30) must be "worth" something. >>

As the others have implied, I don't think "vintage" = "value", which is where you seem to be getting hung up. Nowhere did I say that "30 years old" means it must be worth something, but you have to admit that lumping 1975 Topps together with Xfractors is a bit silly. To me, cards should be categorized logically into eras, for example:

Pre-war (up to WW1) - primarily tobacco
Inter-war (1920s up to 1941) - mix of tobacco, candy and gum cards
Post war (up to 1955, the end of Bowman)
Early modern (1956 to 1980, the end of the Topps monopoly)
Mid modern (1981 to 1987, the first wave of competition with Donruss and Fleer)
Late modern (1988 to present, the second wave of competition with Score, Upper Deck, et al.)

You can give these whatever arbitrary titles or dates you want, but the point is they are based on commonalities between issues, not on production runs or value.

Buccaneer

I guess my rambling post this morning truly did not make any sense because that was what I attempted to say.

jaxxr

"Vintage" is always subject to one's experiences and frame of references. A person's age and the year we are currenly in, also infuences opinion. There is no right or wrong view in absolute terms.

For what little it may be worth;

?? up to and includes 1916 Antique Vintage
1917 to and includes 1950 Standard Vintage
1951 to and includes 1980 Bubblegum Vintage
1981 to and includes 1988 Standard Modern
1989 to and includes 2000 Hi-Tech Modern
2001 to and includes 2005 Current

Every New Years day the oldest year from current is taken away from current and added to Hi Tech Modern, the year of the New year is added to current, always the most recent five years.

There has been some thought put into each era and how it is configured. I will not bore all with my ideas, reasons, themes, etc., but since the original question was about the last year for vintage......

1980 was truly an era coming to an end. Last only one card for a rookie, last only one major set. Continuation of yearly price guides, the second one came out in 1980 which confirmed baseball card collecting was here to stay as an adult hobby. First National Convention for sportscards. The absolute end of Topps' monoply. 25 years also is the general public notion for vintage anything.

Daeyel

Call me biased, but vintage, to me. is anything 1984 and prior.
I am not sure on production runs of 1985 and 1986, but 1987 was obviously over done.

I also consider 1986 the beginning of the modern rookie card craze.
1983 had some precursors, as Gwynn, Boggs and Sandberg, and Kittle and Strawberry in the Traded set.
1984 had Mattingly, and 85 had Clemens.
But it wasnt until the Canseco 86 Donruss Rated Rookie hit $100 that the modern rookie craze really blew its top and went nuts.

That, really, would mark the new era for sportscards.
At least, for me.

sagard

I'll go with '53 Topps. In my opinion they had more in common with the cards before them, than the cards after them. After all excluding the size change, '54 Topps to '88 any brand are fundamentally similar with photos and stats on back. The players, designs and certainly present day values certainly changed with the times.