The discussion in another thread about x'ed out tagging in Russell jerseys got me to thinking. I knew I had seen a jersey with x'ed out tags in a recent auction. The attached scan is from a Vintage Authentics auction from March. I don't collect Bonds stuff, so I didn't really read the auction description that close at the time. Reading the description now I am amazed at the questions I would have about this jersey after reading the listing.
1. "Tagged 44 but measures 48". Can any Bonds collectors confirm this?
2. "..medium use and fabric wear presumably used for more than one game. The jersey may have been made for the 1994 All-Star game considering Bonds normally wore Rawlings for the 1994 season."
A couple of questions here. First the first statement is a contradiction with the second. Use for more than one game and yet made for the all-star game? That doesn't make sense.
Secondly, can any Bonds collector confirm that her wore Rawling in 1994 even though the rest of the Giants wore Russell? Getty has no clear pictures of Bonds right sleeve which would show the telltale "R" Russell tagging.
Add to this the whole issue of the crossed out tagging and there are all kinds of alarm bells on this one.
The jersey in question had many inconsistencies. All of the inconsistencies were pointed out in the letter in great detail. The jersey was submitted to Louisville Slugger/ Hunt auction from a well respected Louisville Slugger employee. His letter of authenticity and business card was included along with the information regarding the source of how he obtained it.
I would suggest reviewing the letter in its entirety. It will help address the concerns you may have.
Thanks for the chance to review the letter. Your willingness to share information like this with no vested interest in this other than my own enlightenment is commendable.
Owen - - - - - you wrote the following to Troy: "Your willingness to share information like this with no vested interest in this other than my own enlightenment is commendable." - - - - - Isn't the LOA on this Bonds "gamer" an LOA from SCD Authentic? If so, Troy was/is the DIRECTOR of SCD Authentic (and will now be involved in running the SCD Authentic off-shoot called MEARS), so maybe I'm missing something, but I'm pretty sure Troy does have at least three "vested interests" (or, more accurately, areas of interest that he is looking out for), other than your enlightenment: (1) his personal/professional reputation, (2) the reputation of SCD Authentic, and (3) the reputation of MEARS. I would love to think otherwise (and agree with your note), but - - - - - I simply can not.
Re-read what I wrote. I am the one with no vested interest. What I was commending was Troy's willingness to send a copy of the letter to someone who is not a party to the sale.
I for one am willing to withhold judgment until I see the letter.
Owen - - - - - your note still reads the same to me, but thanks for clarifying what you meant. As for withholding judgment, be my guest. I, for one, could not care less what the letter states - the photos and information I have is overwhelming and I will go with my judgment about this jersey to my grave unless I can see photographic evidence to the contrary. - - - - - - I honestly would not believe that Bonds wore this jersey even if Bonds himself stated that he did - as Dave Grob will tell you himself, even the athletes are often very confused about what game items they used and what ones they did not (and yes, there are times when they have lied about an item's game use - - - - - (the hit and homerun bats and jerseys have been suggested as examples) - - - - - I hope I didn't crush anyone's idol fantasies by stating this). I believe it was Dave who wrote an excellent article about that a while back in SCD (the message being about not to blindly trust an athlete's word about an item's game use). Owen, please be clear that my response to you was in no way intended to attack what you said; I respect your opinion and your decision to withhold judgment and I think it is courteous of you to thank Troy for his troubles - - - - - - P.S. If anyone is interested in betting that this jersey is good, I'll take that bet. It would be great to make some easy money. I think this is a much safer bet than betting on Joel winning the World Series of Poker (no offense, Joel). Instead of contacting the Louisville Slugger consignor (like that inherently carries any weight at all), contacting the manufacturer might be more sensible. Just trying to help - collectors: use common sense and don't let your collecting wishes get the best of you and lead you to make bad purchases.
I know you said you would withhold judgment, but I think you've made the correct decision. The crossed-out tag is certainly enough - and you don't need the LOA to see the photo of the tag. I'm with you.
My concern over the tagging was the whole reason that I posted this item to begin with. Troy is on record as saying that the crossed out tagging issue was not one that they were aware of at the time.
My point in posting this item was to point out that items with crossed out tags were in national auctions as well as to chronicle the other items which were dubious about this jersey.
I don't care if the letter is signed by God - - - - - I wouldn't touch that jersey with a 10-foot pole. In fact, I wouldn't touch it with 10-foot pole for the crossed-out tag alone, never mind the long laundry list of other problems. Fellow collectors: LOA or not, sometimes you have to use some common sense. Think about all of the inconsistencies and problems with this jersey - - - - - what about the photos or description make it sound like it is one of Bonds' real gamers?
As a collector, each person has to decide what their criteria for collecting should be. Our job is to accurately and consistently evaluate a jersey and provide that information to the collector. In the case of the Bonds jersey in question, there were more than one points of contention. When examining the Bonds jersey, all of these points were described. Then, the consignor explained his relationship with the Giants equipment manager and his relationship with Louisville Slugger. All of these facts were presented in the final letter. The bidder was afforded full disclosure of the negative facts of the jersey along with how the jersey was obtained (provenance) .
I have not been contacted since the ending of the auction so I assume the winning bidder was happy with his purchase and the letter we provided.
Personally, you have the right not to purchase items that do not meet your collecting criteria. As long as all of the facts are accurately presented, the final decision is left to the buyer. So as always, ask to see the entire letter before making your bidding decisions.
...but I got it from my milkman's uncles best friend who knows Bonds....
June 9 2005, 2:22 PM
I posted the following in response to Reid's posting about learning information as a collector, however, want to repost it here.
I can't help but laugh at Troy and others who continue to hide behind letters of authenticity. Either a jersey is genuine or not-end of story. With this Bond's jersey, is it possible to put more of a spin on the use, fabric, tagiing with an X, etc? Throw a letter of authenticty with any item, and presto-it now is legit, regardless of glaring inconsistencies. And for Troy to indicate that the jersey has not been returned? how about this poor person who now owns it, and 10 years decides to sell it. No doubt those who wrote the letter will refund the original price-just like the fake glove DiMaggio glove controversy. I'm ready to puke!
Below is my posting from earlier today:
Reid-
Thanks for the warm words.
The Wise no hitter jersey and hat have been in my collection for years, and only recently did I question if the date code in the hat matched the year (1971) that it worn (according to my source). If the code read 1972, then I had a problem. My Phillies source has always been correct with details, including years, sizes, etc., so it only confirmed waht I was told and makes the hat and shirt all the more special in my collection.
Like yourself, I too am always learning. Learning that this "hobby" is always changing, sometimes for the better, sometimes not. I sincerely wish that the entire "letter of authenticity" issue would die a quick death. When I entered the hobby in 1982, collectors and dealers spent the time to research and educate themselves on equipment. Today, the vultures known as authenticators have jumped on the bandwagon and planted the nasty little "doubt" seed that makes collectors seek a letter of authenticity. I only wish people would turn to available resources (photos, baseball cards, programs, other collectors to name a few)before simply slapping down hard earned money for a shirt and accepting that it genuine based on a letter.
Phillies are my speciality-as such, I have seen so many bogus Pete Rose, Schmidt, Carlton and even Bowa jerseys over the last few years that have "letters" from the so called experts. When the buyer is confronted with specific problems of why the shirt is bad, the response is always the same-"But I have a letter from Unle Joe's Baseball World" or "my brothers best friends plumber was best friends with Mike Schmidt's pool boy and got this in exchange for a pool cleaning and wrote me a letter". Are you buying a letter or a jersey? I will be more than happy to inspect any Phillies jersey free of charge, should I be asked. Sorry, I'll be more than happy to add my two cents about it being legit or not, but no letters on jerseys I have not personally obtained directly from the Phillies.
I am learning, Reid. I am learning that the so called "letter of authenticity" from a third party is a joke and you can wipe your rear end with them. I am learning that collectors need to spend the needed time to research their purchases before laying down hard earned dollars. If a letter is to be of any value, please, let it be a team issued letter.
I only hope others learn that a letter is only worth the piece of paper it is writen on.
Buy the jersey/bat/shoes/jacket, and forget about the letter of authenticity craze.
Dr. Vikes is not on vacation. I have nothing new to report right now and frankly I grew very tired of typing the same things over and over to dealers and their friends that want to worry more about $$ than hearing the truth. It was amusing at first but tiresome there after.
As I said last month, we are entering a "new" phase that I called the "quiet before the storm". I think we are all seeing that now, but storms are brewing in the background though.
With all the hullaballou about the new MEARS and old SCDA and all the previous incarnations of authenticators its like the old WHO song entitled "Won't Get Fooled Again":
"...Meet the new boss...same as the old boss..."- Pete Townsend
That Bonds Giants jersey to me at least is a joke. You used to be able to buy Russell Athletic X-outs (which is a term for blem or over-run in the sporting goods industry) at TJ Maxx or various closeout clothing places across the country dirt cheap over the years.
In whatever incarnation the authenticators go by today, tomorrow or next week remember that they have authenticated so much fake stuff the lines between real and fake are so blurred anymore it is sickening.
But as long as there is $$ to be made, the acronyms will keep coming!
Crossed-off-tag Manny SCDA jersey ends on Ebay today
June 11 2005, 10:56 AM
For those of you who are keeping up with the going market prices for a crossed-off-tag star player jersey, the Manny SCDA jersey ends today on Ebay - - - - -
GV is correct in as much as it is common knowledge in the sporting goods industry (but not the memorabilia business) that the companies who make the on field/rink uniforms for the different sports often times will have made extra uniforms or incorrect uniforms (wrong size, length, tailoring) etc. that a home needs to be found for since they do actually cost money to make. The manufacturers also sometimes kept a limited extra inventory for the teams so that if the need arouse for additional quantities that they would not have to custom make them from scratch. This is usually done as a service to the teams and not make any small needs an emergency for the factory.
Often times there are not enough of them (by team or specific color)for the company who made them to sell off to some minor league or College/H.S./Youth team, so they are usually sold in company outlets (ex. Both Starter and Champion did this for many many years when they were both big deals in on field and college uniforms back in the 70's and early 80's through their own outlet stores around the county) or "off-price" places like T.J. Maxx etc. to recoup some costs.
The practice of cutting or slicing the tags and or marking them in permanent ink was a way for the company to "de-value" them and prevent someone selling them or more importantly returning it to a regular sports store for a full refund.
I hope this helps a little. My personal advice is that if the company name is defaced or the neck tag sliced, beware of it.
Where's Rocco to defend American Memorabilia on this fake jersey?
June 28 2005, 1:01 PM
Roc-co, you there? We miss you! Come defend your sugar daddy! Another fine job by American Memorabilia and another fine job by the EXPERT AUTHENTICATORS - - - - - and the hits just keep on comin'.
Roc-co!, Roc-co!, Roc-co!
AMICHRIS (Chris from AMI) - - - - - do you want to defend this one? Lou Lampson (the finest baseball uniform authenticator ever), how about you? - - - - - - What about the green Ripken jersey? Are we EVER going to hear back about that? Maybe we should all write to Lou at his address (using the only contact info that he'll provide people with) - - - - but we better hurry as Lou is on the move and will have a new address soon! - - - - - - - Perhaps AMI could save some money and have Roc-co do all of their authentication (we know he'd do it for free since he's such a huge fan) - - - - - his evals couldn't be any worse. Oh, don't want to forget Sammy - - - - Sammy, you are welcome to chime in and defend your heroes, too! - - - - - Well, I've got to run - - got to hurry and waste my money bidding on the fake jerseys!
If Troy and his cronies are serious about cleaning up the industry from the questionable items (garbage) that quite often turns up over and over again, he should take a stand and contact the winning bidder of the Bonds jersey and offer a refund since there are now questions surrounding the item.
The poor sap who got roped into that one may not know that a forum like this exists and thus may not know that an X-ed out tag is a huge red flag. As GV said before, "I wouldn't touch this one with a 10 ft. pole"
Re: Where's Rocco to defend American Memorabilia on this fake jersey?
June 28 2005, 10:25 PM
Before people start going nuts on Chris here, I want to know who called AMI to ask about the jersey with the Xd out tagging. Their number is everywhere, but did anyone call?
There is an "Expert" on Every Corner in This Forum!
June 29 2005, 1:29 AM
Eric has a good point. I am certainly no defender of AMI or any other auction house as I have had my issues with various auctions in the past. But I will say this about Chris at AMI. He has NEVER failed to correct a mistake that I have pointed out to him. He has always been responsive and quick to act once I have presented him with evidence and documentation. You guys should try that method sometimes as it actually works.
Now, let's talk about "cut" and marked tagging. I would think that Vikes would be the guy in the know as he has alluded to his experince in the sporting goods business. Having said that, here is a fact from my own experiences that debunks much that has been said on this subject.
Several years ago, I stumbled onto a UAB football jersey on ebay. Being a UAB grad and possessing a large collection of UAB gamers, I contacted the seller. He said that he had obtained it along with several dozen other UAB white road football jerseys from Russell Athletics. This seller said that he often obtained "seconds" and other similar items directly from Russell and sold them on ebay as "salesman samples", "factory rejects", etc. He did not sell these jerseys as being "game worn", and he never once alluded that these UAB jerseys were ever used.
I asked him to send me a list of the UAB jerseys, and I ended up buying a few of my favorite players under the assumption that these were "seconds" and had never even made it to the UAB campus.
When I received the jerseys I was floored to see that the jerseys showed excellent game use. I compared the jerseys to ones in my collection and found that the only difference was that the jerseys I had just obtained had mesh shoulders, while all the other ones in my collection had satin/knit shoulders. I researched the matter further and found photos of UAB wearing white mesh-shouldered jerseys for several games early in the 1999 season before switching to the satin shoulders.
What's really interesting to note about these jerseys is that that each one has cut tags (tagging is still intact, but has been sliced vertically down the middle). I am not sure why the school would return these jerseys to Russell. Perhaps Vikes can give more insight on this issue.
Again, I am not trying to defend anyone out there who is selling factory "seconds" and "rejects" as game-used jerseys. I am simply trying to point out that there are always exceptions to the rules. Some folks need to understand this concept and think things through (see my post from yesterday regarding baseball bats) before shouting "fake" every time they see something that doesn't fit the norm. Sit in with a dealer after he has made a bulk buy or spend time at shows such as The National with experienced and trusted dealers like Hartel Sports. Having made a few bulk buys directly from teams over the past 30 years, I can assure you that there are always some strange and unusual items that end up in the inventory - items that are exceptions to the rules.
GV,
Regarding the x'd out tag lots. I have called our authenticators about the matter.
I never received an email from you about this. I also can be reached at our offices at 1-800-430-0667. I can assure you that we were not trying to mislead our customers by selling a couple hundred dollar jersey. We are looking into it and if it is deemed unauthentic, it will be removed from our auction.
Thank you,
chris
Chris - - - - thanks for your response. I sent the email to ami21@lvcm.com - - - - - your email address listed on Ebay. Thanks for looking into that as that jersey is not good, I am sure - - - - if you read all of the other threads on this forum about crossed-off tag jerseys, you will understand what I'm talking about. The posts about you on this forum have all been positive - - - and I am sure that you work hard to correct things like this. - - - - - I am a big fan of Sammyqua and he thinks I should lighten up a bit - - - so in an attempt to honor his request, I am going to leave it at that and just say thanks again. - - - - - - Still, I do have to wonder how your "authenticators" could sign their names on a letter that states that this jersey was game worn. I know you are not the authenticator, but you may want to think about this question as I'm assuming you guys are paying these "experts" top dollar for their "expert" opinions.
A bit off-topic so forgive me, but I just received a jersey that I won in your June auction that is very different than described in the AMI write-up. I have sent an email to AMI thru the website to this end but I would like to establish a constructive dialogue with you to resolve this matter. Can you email me please?
Steve, please call 1-800-430-0667 and we can talk about it. I don't even know which jersey you are referring to, but if the item was not described correctly, I am sure we will resolve the matter.
chris
John-
If you're going to make a charge like that, please sign your name to it or a proper email address so they can fix the problem. if you provide a false one, it's hard to take it seriously.
Eric
Chris at AMI stepped right up to the plate and did the right thing. I had a concern about a jersey that I won, relayed this to Chris and he immediately agreed to a refund. While this doesn't address the more fundamental issue of full disclosure in auction descriptions I 100% applaud AMI for being customer friendly, in my case at least.
Nice to have a quick resolution without name-calling and legal BS.
Hey Guys,
Just wanted to let you know that the Braves jersey in our auction is good. The Braves x'd out gamers that were sold in charity auctions.
Thanks,
chris
I have a couple of these jerseys (a perfect Glavine home, for example, and a beautiful Maddux, as well). The markings on their tags have been inconsistent over the years. I believe my Glavine has the BA BF, but no Xed-out marking. I'll look at them when I am home and follow up - will try to provide scans, too. Do you guys have scans of a tag with both the BA BF and the Xed-out marking? Does anyone know why they would have added the second marking (the X-ed out mark) instead of just the BA BF? That is, what extra significance would X-ing out the tag have on top of marking it with the BA BF?
How Misinformation Gets Out Into The Hobby And Becomes Gospel
July 2 2005, 11:57 PM
There are some folks in the hobby (including this forum) who are real quick to call items "fake", blister authenticators, bad-mouth dealers and other sellers, and start the bonfire based on information that is not entirely accurate. First we had the Majestic 0062/6200 misinformation, now we have the Russell x'd out and cut/sliced tagging misinformation (see above posts including my post on cut/sliced tags).
While I wholeheartedly agree with many of the points made in this forum about fake items, authenticator errors, bad items on ebay, etc., etc., etc., every collector needs to grasp hold of the fact that there are always exceptions to the rule. The "myth" has been debunked with the Majestic 0062/6200 tagging, and the "myth" about the Russell x'd out and cut/sliced tagging has also been proven to not be true in all cases.
Sure, the flag should be raised anytime a Majestic jersey has the 6200 numbering or a Russell jersey has the markout or cut tags, but that shouldn't be the final determinant.
The folks who are dispensing inaccurate information in this forum and the hobby in general are no different than an incompetent authenticator who they are quick to bash. After all, bad information is bad information. My suggestion to all of you (forum experts and professional authenticators) is either be right, or be quiet!
"and the "myth" about the Russell x'd out and cut/sliced tagging has also been proven to not be true in all cases."
Not saying anyone is right or wrong, but I just checked my Glavine and Maddux jerseys (from the Braves charity auctions). I remembered them correctly. The Glavine has "BF-BA" in black marker on the manufacturer tag and the Maddux tags are clean. Neither has an X-ed out tag. Neither has a cut tag. Can I see an X-ed out tag (or a cut tag) on a jersey that is known to be good? I'm not sure how you define the word "proven" but I haven't seen proof yet, based on how I define the term. Again, I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong ... I just missed the "proof" that there are X-ed out tags or cut tags on good jerseys.
You must have missed my first post in this string about the UAB jerseys with cut/sliced tagging and Splinters' example about the Braves jerseys. I have dealt with Splinters and have no reason not to trust or believe what he says, especially considering the source of said jerseys. And of course I trust myself. (If I don't trust myself, who am I going to trust?)
If I went by the conventional "rules" that "cut/sliced" tags mean that a jersey is a "second" or "factory reject", then I wouldn't have four fine game-worn jerseys from my alma mater. For that matter, if I would have stuck by the conventional "rules" for the past 30 years, there would be several wonderful items in my collection that I would have passed over.
Adding another example of "hobby myths" is that for many years, a lot of collectors swore that any Russell jersey with tags in the neck was a store model and not a "gamer". I learned that this "myth" was not always true after a visit with the legendary Dick Dobbins. It was a fine lesson to learn as I was able to add some nice items to my collection (especially 1996 NFL jerseys and college jerseys) at great prices because most collectors would not touch these items because of the neck tag "myth".
As mentioned in one of my previous posts, spend some time at The National with a dealer or visit them after they have made a bulk buy, and you quickly learn that there are always "exceptions to the rules". Having made a few bulk buys through the years myself, I can assure you that there will inevitably be a strange item or two that comes out of the locker room that goes against all of the "rules". And repeating another point previously stated, the red flag should be raised anytime that a Russell jersey has the markout or cut tags (or the neck tag, for that matter), but that shouldn't be the final determinant.
I understand better what you are saying. Thanks. And I agree with you that there are often exceptions...for example, I know of instances where players have worn store/retail jerseys in a pinch, for example, and you'd never be able to convince collectors that those jerseys are actually game worn, even though they are more real that some of the properly tagged jerseys that are never worn!
I would still like to see those Braves charity auction jerseys with the X-ed out tags if anyone can post a scan of one or more. This is just for my personal eduction as I do have a couple of these jerseys and neither of them have the X-ed out tags (though one does have the BF-BA marking, as I stated above).
If needed, I can send you photos of the UAB jerseys with the clipped tags. Or, if you live in the DC area or are headed to The National, I can bring one along for viewing. Feel free to contact me at neet@erols.com
Thanks. I was finally able to view the Ashby jersey with the X-ed out tag in the current AMI auction. It wasn't coming up for me earlier when I tried. I've never seen a Braves charity auction jersey with tag markings like that, though that jersey is from 2000 and mine are both (Maddux and Glavine) from 2002. I viewed a lot of the ones from 2002 and none of them had the X-ed out mark, which is why I was interested. Clearly, the markings on the tags for these charity auctions have been inconsistent (which shouldn't surprise anyone that much). If you wouldn't mind posting a scan or two (or sending it/them to me at rgf2@hotmail.com), I'd like to see the cut tag jersey(s) you are referring to ... again, just for my education and my photo reference library/notes. Thanks again,
Mark wrote - - - - The folks who are dispensing inaccurate information in this forum and the hobby in general are no different than an incompetent authenticator who they are quick to bash. After all, bad information is bad information.
A few things in response - - - -
(1) Mark - - - - please feel free to buy up all of the jerseys with cut tags and crossed out tags. I'm sure you'll have a really great collection that you can be proud of. - - - - - The Braves may cross off some of their tags in addition to adding other markings (though I haven't seen them), but in general, these are extras and dump jobs that come straight from the factories. This is a FACT, regardless of what you want to believe and what allows you to sleep better at night.
(2) One difference between people on this forum who share information (whether correct or incorrect) and the authenticators is that nonauthenticator forum members don't charge money for their opinions - - - - - so, when mistakes are made, it has not been at the significant expense of some innocent collector who didn't know any better than to waste his money on an authenticator's "expert" assessment
(3) Another difference is that nonauthenticator forum members are not claiming to be experts, like the authenticators do. The authenticators call themselves experts, charge large fees for "expert" evaluations and authentication, and then make MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE
- - - - - - I realize that sammyqua and you are upset when your heroes' MANY mistakes are exposed, but that is no reason to be mad at forum members who post information on this site for free in order to help fellow collectors out. Everyone is going to make some mistakes - - - - but when you are calling yourselves experts, giving yourselves fake graduate degrees, padding your pockets while doing mere cursory reviews of items, and charging high fees for doing little work (like not even checking photos on getty or corbis), and just plain making stuff up (like with the supposed St. Pats Ripken jersey comparison) and you are making MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE AFTER MISTAKE, then it is somewhat upsetting and concerning to thinking collectors.
If you had read my numerous posts, or even knew me for that matter, you would know that I have a strong disdain for authenticating services. But I also have a very strong distaste for anyone who posts misleading information. Just because someone gives information "for free" doesn't make erroneous information any less damaging. Like I stated previously, bad information is bad information, regardless of the source.
The intent of my posts in this string is to simply be the devil's advocate and show that there are sometimes "exceptions to the rule". And I will repeat it one more time, the red flag should be raised anytime that a Russell jersey has the markout or cut tags (or the neck tag, for that matter), but that should not be the final determinant.
As for your last paragraph, I have no idea why you are pointing your wrath at me. I have never claimed to be an "expert", and have nothing to do with the authenticating business or the folks that do it as a profession. I am simply trying to share my experiences with the other fine folks in this forum. I have been in this hobby for a real long time, and I feel that it is my obligation to share my experiences if the topic warrants.
Feel free to contact me personally if you have any issues with me. I will be glad to talk to you about any of these issues and the hobby in general. You might be surprised that we have a lot more in common than what you think, it's just that we have an entirely different method of delivering the message.
I am not pointing my wrath at you - - - I don't actually have a wrath - - - - yes, I'm angry about some things (clearly) - - - - but no wrath and if there were a wrath, it would not be pointed at you. - - - - and I was not saying that you were presenting yourself as an expert. - - - - - I was just distinguishing nonauthenticator forum members (most of whom have the best of intentions and offer their info for free, without calling themselves experts) from the so-called authenticators/experts. that is all. - - - - - the similarity that you drew between the two groups you listed above is something I strongly disagree with, though. the authenticators/experts are a unique group in so many ways (I tried to point out the differences above - - - sounds like I didn't do a good job). but no, I don't have any issues with you and I'm glad to hear that the authenticators/experts are not your heroes. - - - - happy fourth of july.
As I have stated before, I am not upset, just tired of the same old postings about the same old things.
I have no interest, personal or professional in any authenticator or company that you rant about. I have never met any of these people.
Out of the thousands of items these people have authenticated, can't you come up with a few new ones instead of the same old tired items? The FEW mistakes SCDA made that I am aware of, they have purchased the item back. Have you done that when you are wrong?
As I also have stated, I do not have any heroes. The only person I have ever held in high esteem and would be considered my "Hero", if you must use that term, is Jesus Christ. Everybody else fails to compare in the slightest way.
G.V. - Thanks for the clarification. I understand your point about the difference between the two groups, and in my humble opinion, I agree with you that it is more troublesome for a variety of reasons when authenticators get it wrong. But on the other hand, bad information that gets out into the hobby is still bad information, regardless of the source.
Sammy - An excellent last paragraph! Not trying to speak for G.V., but I think that some of the points in Jim Yackel's current "Weekly Editorial" (July 3) on the Jim's Jerseys website http://www.jimyackel.com/editorial.htm speak to some (but not all) of the frustrations of G.V., myself, and others in the hobby.
I don't think that any of us expect anyone to be perfect. We all mess up at some point in this hobby - that's how we learn. But it is troubling to see the number of mistakes that are being caught, especially when it involves something that is common knowledge to folks who are "niche" collectors in that certain area. It makes one wonder how many mistakes aren't being caught.
This hobby made out quite well for many, many years without authenticating services. I do not begrudge anyone in that business nor do I have an axe to grind with them other than to say that we made it quite well for all those years without them.
The bottom line is this - do we feel any safer today from seeing fraud and fake jerseys in the hobby than we did in the previous three decades? I, for one, can resoundingly say, "NO!"
Mark - - - - - thanks for the link to Jim Yackel's webpage and editorial. - - - like you, I agree with much of what he had to say. - - - - I also agree with a bunch of what Vikes has had to say on this forum. - - - - I couldn't help but notice that both Jim and Vikes like to use the term "Kool Aid drinking" when referring to collectors who want to believe that the authenticators are gods and do no wrong. - - - - - Is this a common term? Or is it a coincidence that Vikes and Jim like to use this term when speaking about the authenticators?
Sammyqua wrote - - - - "The FEW mistakes SCDA made that I am aware of, they have purchased the item back."
Sammyqua - - - - I assume that you keep up with the forum on a regular basis. If this assumption is valid, then how could it possibly be that you are aware of only a "FEW" mistakes made by SCDA? This is one of your most mind-boggling statements yet (which is saying quite a bit, because you've had some real winners). Webster's defines "few" as - - - "not many; a small number of." You may want to send your rose-colored glasses into the authenticators for an expert examination.
A VERY FEW, in comparison to the actual number they have authenticated.
Whereas your verbiage of the term "MANY" implies far more then reality, which is something I don't think you live in all the time.
Why don't you state a complete list of all the ones SCDA has authenticated that you know for a fact are bad, and state the facts why? That shouldn't take you very long at all.
You are starting to become the "town crier" of this forum. You rarely educate and if you have a chance to stir sh*t up just for the sake of starting trouble you will. I think you began to bother me when you started to take cheap shots at people in threads that had nothing to do with them (Sammy, Rocco etc..). To me, it has worn thin, but you'll keep beating the sh*t out of that dead horse. And God forbid anyone disagree with you, then they are labeled by you as "authenticator lovers" when maybe they are simply just "GV haters"
That's just my take, but i wonder how many other readers feel the same as me....
For those of you are not sick to death of this topic yet (I realize I may be the only one!), here is a new twist on the Braves Charity Auction jersey tag markings:
I had posted earlier that the Braves have been inconsistent in how they have marked their charity auction jerseys (from no marking at all to ... BA/BF in black marker to ... X-ed out tag with BA/BF to ... X-ed tag with the Star of David!). I guess I understated the matter as the Braves have been really inconsistent. Any others that people know about?
That is not a Braves Auction marking. In the past Andruw marked his important jerseys with the Star of david. The 250th HR Anduw Jersey had the "2" and Star of David marked on tag.
Thanks for the info. That is good (and interesting) to know.
Dave:
While I agree with you (and Mark Hayne and Splinters) that there are clearly exceptions to the X-ed tag rule (and I personally have seen a lot weirder exceptions to equipment/jersey standards and rules than this), I would probably steer clear of the vast majority of X-ed tag jerseys. Braves Charity Auction jerseys are an exception (and I'm sure there are others), but based on all of the information that has been shared, the X-ed out tag jerseys, generally speaking, seem to me to be questionable at best. I had a great discussion with Mark about this outside of the forum and he showed me some other exceptions (football jerseys) that are also very cool and interesting. But I think he would agree, too, that these X-ed out jerseys are, in most cases, bad news. Just my take on it, given all of the information that has been shared. I think your point is, though, that some of the criticisms have been too rigid and over-the-top, and I agree with you about this. As always, thanks to Eric, as this has been a great discussion and I doubt it would have happened without this forum.
GV, Vikes, et al., now. You've all stated that you've never seen "x"'d out tagging that was legit, and you'd all stay clear...How about "Star of David" markings? Is that "kosher"? ...I'm sure that you've never seen this marking before. If they can put a star why can't they put an X ? Why is the star more plausable than the "x" because it comes from MLB? I'll bet if this came from an authenticator, it would have been bashed...
