Poll wrap-up to What Game Set Would You Play Online?

Thanks to everyone who chimed in on last week's poll: which game set I should create for online play?

1960s Milton-Bradley Baseball Card Game (box)

It was an even vote split between 1951 Topps Red / Blue Back, 1968 Topps Game, and 1978 Topps "Regular," so sounds safe to start programming with any of them and update it as time allows for more work. Who knows, maybe we'll even see something as sophisticated as the Milton-Bradley game above one day!

1968 Topps #177, Koosman / Ryan (game or pack?)

And speaking of Milton-Bradley, another of their Topps-licensed products ("Win-a-Card") continues to mystify many modern collectors, who wonder if that white left edge means their Nolan Ryan RC came out of a game box.

Poll: Which Game Set Would You Play?

I'm revamping my software coding skills and itching for a project. I've long thought about converting vintage game-themed baseball sets into playable online versions, so fans and collectors could spin through games on the web instead of doing responsible things with their time. But the $64,000 question is...which set first? Check the list below and cast a vote to push me in the right direction!

1. 1951 Topps Blue and Red Backs 

1951 Topps Red Back #5, Johnny Pesky

Topps began mass-producing baseball cards with this pair of game sets. They're not hard to find today, but few collectors risk the condition of either batch of 52 players by riffling, dealing, and flipping them competitively.

DIFFICULTY: Easy to find scans of all 52 cards and uncomplicated results ("OUT") make this one straightforward.

2. 1968 Topps Game

1968 Topps Game #5, Harmon Killbrew

17 years later, Topps made a second trip to the well with this "floating head" design that now reminds me of Allen & Ginter.

2007 Allen & Ginter #94, Charlie Manuel

DIFFICULTY: Easy to find scans of 1968's 33 players, but extra game situations like "Double (all runners score)" make this a bit more work than the 1951 version.

3. 1978 Topps "Regular"

1978 Topps #400, Nolan Ryan

This 792-card set moved its game to the back, a nice bonus that didn't interfere with face space on the front.

DIFFICULTY: It would take a bunch of time to collect the scans, but game logic is straightforward and similar that seen in 1951.

4. 1935 Goudey Knot Hole League Game & 1936 Big League Gum

1935 Knot Hole League Game #5 (score card)

1935 Knot Hole League #5 (back)

I dug into the history of Goudey's Knot Hole League and related promotions in late 2013. The text-only set's not much to look at, but remains interesting as an artifact of its era. Should be fun to combine with players and situations from 1936's Big League Gum.

1936 Big League Back, Oral Hildebrand (game back)

DIFFICULTY: Knot Hole League is obscure and finding all 24 scans online is tough, given low collector demand. It's not hard to put together a Big League Gum set, so starting with that and adding some of the score cards might be easier than Knot Hole League alone.

5. 1933-34 Goudey Sport Kings Varsity Football

1933-34 Sport Kings Varsity Football #5

A close cousin that predates Goudey's Knot Hole League (and also mentioned in its profile), this text-only football set's so rare that I hadn't seen a real card until 2013. This one's especially interesting for its glimpse into 1930s football plays, positions, and rules.

DIFFICULTY: I've found scans for half of the 24 cards so far. Goudey printed paper "fields" that connect with card play, but it's possible none survive in the modern marketplace, so I'd need to create my own or go without.

So what would you like to play most? I'll keep the poll running for awhile and update on decision/progress.

Poll: Would you rather have Mantle or Wagner?

I swapped a few messages with Cardboard Icons today about the pursuit of a playing-era card for the Hall of Fame's first class of inductees: Walter Johnson, Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Christy Mathewson, and Honus Wagner. He's got a type card for all but the Wagner, which proves elusive given the Mona Lisa status of Honus's T206.

"The Holy Grail" by Tim Carroll

Our chat made me wonder: would collectors rather have an early Wagner (other than T206) or one of the Mantle rookies? It takes more than a grand to land a low-grade, authenticated tobacco Wagner or Mantle RC, so it's not a decision made lightly.

The most-desirable Wagner cards range from late 19th century cabinets to early 1910s tobacco cards, so I plucked a couple of his "cheaper" options to go up against The Mick's 1951 Bowman and 1952 Topps rookies. Which of these four would you rather spend $1000-2000 on? (Assume all are in equally low grade.)

1908 E98 Anonymous "Set of 30"

1914 T216 Peoples Tobacco

1951 Bowman #253 (my personal fave)

1952 Topps #311

FINAL RESULTS: 1952 Topps Mantle gets 50% of the vote, with the other voters split evenly between the 1951 Bowman and two Wagners. 1952 Topps, still the collector favorite! Thanks for voting, everyone.

Poll wrap-up on 2011's turnaround team

Thanks to folks for voting! Baltimore edged out KC and Seattle for most likely to turn their team bus around this year and play some better ball.

The Oriole watch is on!

Can't blame the enthusiasm after their improved performance following Showalter's arrival, but it'll still be a hard division to compete in.

Wednesday poll: Most likely to improve in 2011?

As a fan, you expect teams to play hard every day, whether or not pundits and betting lines expect them to win. Even the worst MLB squads end up with about 60 victories over a full season, after all, so who says Seattle or Pittsburgh won't beat Tampa Bay or Philly next time out? Today's poll asks who will turn their poor 2010 showing into a better 2011.

My personal and sentimental vote goes to Seattle, who plays in a middling division and can't possibly hit worse than they did last season. To do so would be an offense worthy of our criminal courts. Add your tally and optimism to the sidebar--do Baltimore folks think Showalter can make their strong 2010 finish run into this year?

Poll wrap-up: Would you pick up this card?

Thanks to everyone for "picking up" results for last Friday's poll. 14 folks chimed in on what cards they'd rescue from the dustbin, with these rough percentages of yes votes.

• 1964 Torre: 90%
• 1975 Tiant: 75%
• 1984 Ripken: 50%
• 1992 Sierra: 15%
• 2003 Gwynn: 30%

Good to see folks haven't lost their goodwill toward modern cards. Of course, I didn't include this fine fellow, on display over at the Ugly Baseball Cards post "A Word From Our Sponsors."

1992 Fleer #708

Oy vey.

POLL UPDATE: Runs scored over the weekend

Thanks to all who entered Friday's TOTAL RUNS IN THE ALCS and NLCS contest. What people guessed depends on both how many games you think will be played and what you think of the pitchers and hitters. Lowest possible is 8, should both winners sweep all 1-0 games. Reality's far above that, and A.J. Burnett hasn't even taken the hill yet.

New York's game 4 starter, baby!

The Yankees dropped 8 of A.J.'s last 10 starts, but for my Yankee-rooting friends, it probably felt like all of 'em.

Let's check the contest entries, from low to high.

• Ryan: 42 
• Don: 54 
• Mark: 57
• AdamE: 63
• Captain Canuck: 67
• Chris Stufflestreet: 69 (dudes)
• Play at the Plate: 73
• BA Benny: 77
• AlbuqwirkE: 83
• Steve D: 88
• Dan: 94
• Night Owl: 98

After the weekend, we stand at 34 total runs, or 8.5 per game (ALCS has 20 and NLCS 14). With both series tied 1-1 and at least 6 more games coming, the top end of our range is looking good. Might we break 100 with room to spare?

CONTEST: Pre-War Playoff Giveaway 2010

Tonight, the curtain rises on baseball's League Championship Series. To salute the 4 teams who made it thus far, I'm giving away pre-war cards to 4 folks who get closest to this question.

"How many TOTAL RUNS will all teams score in the ALCS and NLCS?"

This is every game from both best-of-7 series, even the easy-to-count, 1-0 masterpieces. No need to predict games or winners, just total runs! Can we believe the hype of ace pitchers blowing everyone away?

How do you qualify?

Add a comment to THIS POST with your guess. Entries accepted until MIDNIGHT PACIFIC TONIGHT, so you CAN wait for tonight's game result, if you think it'll make a difference.

Make sure to guess using a Blogger profile or leave another way to contact you, like an email address. Also, tell your friends! (Want to win without diluting your own chances? Tell your friends who are bad at math!)

What stuff am I giving away?

"Pre-war" means anything issued prior to World War II, so I'll pick from that era. This includes Goudey's famous sets, Play Ball, and candy cards. It's a good bet they'll be low-grade, but still 70+ year-old cardboard!

When will I give it away?

Once we know who's playing in the World Series, I'll total the runs and post a list of winners. Will people tie for 4th place and make me give away MORE cards?

Poll: What day and time do you post?

While researching the history of Rochester's Red Wings for their 1980 TCMA set, "post timing" ran through my head several times. I wondered, is there a best time to hit your Publish button? Does going live at 9am Monday or 9pm Friday make a difference in visitor count? Almost everyone following this blog lives in North America, with similar daylight hours. Are they reading by sunshine or candle light?

To learn more about analytics from my betters, I read through When is the Best Time and Day to Post on Your Blog? from a writer of significantly greater audience.

Most important quote from that story: "The key continues to be have your content waiting when your readers arrive." (Emphasis by the author.)

Sounds like what newspapers have been doing for centuries, right?

I personalized this by dividing the Google Analytics visitor count into 3 phases. Morning (4am - noon), afternoon (noon - 8pm), and night (8pm - 4am).

Click to embiggen the report

Week-to-week, afternoon's green stripe edged out morning's orange for "total visits," with night's yellow tail lagging well behind. This is without scheduling any posts (i.e., "East Coast, 8am"), so is likely skewed by my random writing times.

So, this week's question: do you schedule posts for specific days or times? If so, what do you shoot for?

What locker room questions would you ask?

Don Carman's recent #5 profile mentioned a list of "stock answers" posted on his Phillies locker in 1990. When a reporter asked something that didn't require much thought, I assume Don pointed to the 37 different soundbites and invited them to pick one they liked. My favorite?

"We need two players to take us over the top: Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig."

See Baseball Almanac for the full list of Don's "answers."

In the comments for that Carman card profile, Night Owl pointed out that writers have to tell a story, stock phrases or not. If they see Don's list posted on a locker, that's an invitation to talk about different questions the player wants to answer.

The answer is "42"

If you wore the reporter's hat, what question would you ask?

Poll wrap-up: Longest eBay transaction + 300th post

Thanks for your votes! A few other folks waited a month or more for their transaction to wrap-up, so I don't feel so bad about my current "purchase-and-exchange" stretching out to almost 8 weeks. It's a hard truth that moving everyone's home business to the web (a la eBay) also adds new potentials for delay.

If my math is correct, yesterday's 1980 TCMA Richmond Braves profile of manager Fred "Scrap Iron" Hatfield marked my 300th post to the #5 type blog. While certainly a goal from day one, what blogger confidently expects to reach that kind of post count?

Thanks to everyone who's read an article, commented, or sent me precious cards from their own collection! It's been a personally rewarding trip.

I'll be taking a week off around the 4th of July, returning with more profiles and at least one giveaway by mid-July. Have a good holiday to everyone doing the same! (Wish I could relax in this #5 Yankee Stadium seat that went up for auction earlier this year...)

Poll: How long will you wait for an eBay transaction?

On May 3 (of 2010), I bought the wrong thing on eBay. It's a case of mistaken identity, where I watched two cards and ultimately bought one thinking I had the other. Thousands of transactions since 1996 and I can still push the wrong "Buy It Now" button!

The seller advertised a 7-day return window, so I confirmed his policy by email, repackaged the "wrong" card, and dropped it in the mailbox with money for return postage.

And waited.

On June 1, I emailed to confirm receipt of the exchanged card, since it'd been a couple of weeks. The seller said it arrived OK, but that he was out of country until mid-June. If needed, he could tell his office to send it ASAP.

"No problem," I said, "and no rush. Just send it once you're back." And waited.

Being June 24th, it's been 7 weeks since the original purchase for under $10, and I assume it'll take another reminder email (and waiting into July) at this point.

So today's poll question: What's your "longest" eBay transaction, at least for something that wrapped up successfully? Weeks? Months? A year?

Poll wrap-up: Return a counterfeit card?

It's almost unanimous, 9 of 10 folks voted to return the 1971 Bazooka of debatable authenticity. One said to destroy the card, which would protect any "downstream" collectors from buying something questionable. I completely understand and would've considered it more seriously for a cheaper card. (Apparently, my "take one for the team" cutoff is somewhere below $20.)

1971 Bazooka #5, sorta

To the card seller's credit, he did accept my return and process it quickly. This whole deal's just one card transaction in an ocean of buying and selling, but it's the closest I've been to a 1971 Bazooka's numbered proof set #5. Quoting many a baseball team, "just wait 'til next year!"

• My 1971 Bazooka numbered set profile
• "Would You Keep a Counterfeit Card?" posting

Would you keep a counterfeit card?

I recently purchased a never-saw-it-before #5 Bazooka card on eBay. Though rare, it's not outrageously valuable and the seller set a Buy It Now price around $20, the high book for its condition, according to SCD's annual guide.

The seller's favorable feedback % and high number of total sales pushed me to buy the card, since who knows when it'll pop up again? It definitely didn't seem like an eBay scammer trying a 1-time con. (Most experienced buyers have seen those guys in action.)

Short story, my purchase turned out not so authentic; three things gave it away.

1. Its front picture had "ripples," where the picture-to-backing glue dried unevenly. I've never seen this on authentic Bazookas.
2. Paper peeling at the card edge revealed a hint of colors behind the player photo. In other words, something was printed on the back, flipped over, and reused for more printing. Topps almost never did this.
3. Modern color printers use "dotted" ink printing. Vintage cards don't and this card had it. This is the most damning proof, but can be hard to see with the naked eye. (Check out #3 in this counterfeit-spotting guide.)

The seller accepts "any reason" returns, so I sent the card back. While professional about the process, he also remained confident of its authenticity. Unfortunately, there's not a middle ground for us--it's either an original or not.

Knowing that the seller will probably resell this card, I had second thoughts. Keeping (or even destroying) the #5 might make more sense than returning it. After all, this saves the trouble of a less experienced buyer picking it up, thinking they've got the real deal, and getting a rude surprise much later. Of course, that also wastes my $20!

This week's poll: what would you do? Return the card as I did? Destroy it? Keep it as a souvenir? Add comments if you have other proposals.

Friday poll wrap-up (aka, "when bad things happen to good cards")

Mucho gracias to folks who voted in last week's poll about the "special treatment" your cardboard heroes received during those days as a youthful collector. I gave several options open to anyone with school supplies, including pens, rubber bands, and hole punches. The only one no one picked was "I left my cards alone!" Clearly, we're all veterans of the School of Card Knocks.

You want specifics and we have them.

• Ink autographs, glasses, and beards: 4
• Rubber bands: 5
• Hole punch: 1
• Staples: 1

Here's to cards that put up with that extra love!

Available for only $4!

Whoa!

Friday Poll:

Not sure if I wrapped up the last poll adequately. It gave a bunch of "sizes," card-to-poster, and asked what you collect. In other words, is there an upper limit?

Summary: you fine blog readers collect almost everything not nailed down. While no one picked "posters and Fatheads" explicitly, many said anything was fair game. For my part, the big 16" x 20" 1969 Topps Team Posters remain a favorite set!

Today's poll question covers card abuse. Youngsters (and adults?) often make cards their own by adding facial hair, faking a player's signature, or simply binding them securely with rubber bands. My favorite? Ink beards. What kind of "special features" did you add to cards?

Dr. Inkenstein!

Poll wrap-up: Do you collect big cards?

Thanks to voters in last week's poll! Many folks (OK, most everyone) go for any size, with a few specifying additional types. (Perhaps putting "anything" first would've changed the numbers around. :-)

My collection's largest "card" remains 1969 Topps Team Poster #5, Baltimore Orioles, at 16" x 20". Fortunately, it folds down to 9-card pocket size!

Poll: Do you collect big cards?

Most of today's cards use the iconic 2.5" x 3.5" size Topps established in 1957, but not everyone does that. Even modern sets sometimes juggle their dimensions and try to catch collectors with something unusual.

1988 Topps Big Baseball, 2.75" x 3.75"

Size and orientation makes a big difference to how a collection looks and displays. Topps from 1955, 1956, and 1960 use horizontals exclusively and they pop up occasionally into the 1970s.

1956 Topps, my favorite set, also 2.75" x 3.75"

A size upgrade means bigger pictures and more visual possibilities. This one shows Ted close-up and in-action, something not easily done on a smaller canvas. Check out how other sizes put their space to use.

1953 Red Man NL, 3.5" square

1967 Topps Posters, 5" x 7"

1969 Topps Posters, 16" x 20" (!)

Card storage is most convenient when everything fits in 9-pocket pages, but collecting isn't all about making it easy on ourselves. See the left sidebar for this week's poll: what sizes do you collect?

Poll: What do you think of eBay's fee changes?

Earlier this week, eBay sent this note to non-store accounts who sell with some frequency. (A few items a month for me.)

Starting March 30, 2010 selling on eBay will be a better deal than ever!

• List Auction-style FREE--no Insertion Fees--when you start your Auction-style listing under $1.

• Get new, lower Insertion Fees for all other start prices.

• Either way, pay one easy Final Value Fee of 9% of the winning bid (but never more than $50)-and pay only if your item sells.

• List in Fixed Price for 50¢, with Final Value Fees for the most part staying the same.

This new standard fee structure will replace the current "first 5 listings free"--you'll pay no Insertion Fees whenever you list Auction-style and start pricing under $1!*

Today, I learned that eBay store owners get a very different "deal" that adds significant monthly overhead. This change essentially kills the ability for some card sellers to make any kind of money. Read the White Sox Cards post on The Final Straw of an eBay Seller, excerpt below.

"Why would a company founded on the consumer getting the best deal, shoot itself in the foot at almost every opportunity in the past two years? I haven't been able to offer the best deal on some items for two years. Now, I can't even afford to keep the good fight going."

One angle is that eBay's trying to convert low-margin shops to "active" sellers, where ongoing 99-cent listings allow them to cull more frequent transaction fees. Another take's that they're trying to "clean up" shops that carry over-priced (and thus, under-selling) inventories, by upping the monthly overhead. (I'm thinking of hi-grade slabbed cards from the 1970s for $500.) The impact's not specific to sport cards, of course, yet this seems to impact us more than, say, iPod sellers.


Will this new policy change how you use eBay as a seller (or buyer)?

"Blog labels" poll wrap-up

More voters from last week favored teams and decades over card value and best-of. I'll take that angle when updating blog labels in the near future.

Thanks for your feedback!