PDA

View Full Version : Albert Pujols Bat-serious Issues And Problems



hblakewolf
02-15-2006, 12:35 PM
Forum Members,
I have had private email communication with Chris Boyd (Houston Sports Investments, eBay username game-used-bat) regarding the Albert Pujols game used Louisville Slugger M9 bat he recently listed on eBay. Below, you will find the content of my original email to Chris addressing some issues with the bat in question. Following my email, you will find Chris' response to the issues I raised - which I want to address publicly in this forum.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris-
A customer of mine is seeking a well used Pujols bat, and I have been on the lookout for some time. I noticed the bat you won in December on Ebay seems to now be listed again by you, however, is not being sold as the same bat.

Chris, for your reference, these are the listings for the Pujols bat in question.
Your recent Pujols bat listing:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Albert-Pujols-2005-Game-Used-St-Louis-Cardinals-Bat_W0QQitemZ8765528441QQcategoryZ60596QQssPageNam eZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem (http://cgi.ebay.com/Albert-Pujols-2005-Game-Used-St-Louis-Cardinals-Bat_W0QQitemZ8765528441QQcategoryZ60596QQssPageNam eZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)

The original eBay listing for this bat:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=60596&item=8732012225 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=60596&item=8732012225)

Below are the issues associated with this bat:

The knob. The "notch" on the knob, just above the #5, is in the exact position on both the original eBay bat and your recently listed bat. The "5" and the "4-2" are also exactly the same. Both these facts make it clear that it's the exact same bat. The only difference between the two bats is the addition of the stars that you refer to in your description. The stars were not on the bat originally, but somehow appeared between the time it was originally sold on eBay and it's most recent listing date.

The knob, part two. In your eBay description, you state the the stars on the knob were added by Albert Pujols. Since these are obviously the same bat (based on the evidence presented here), there is no way Pujols added the stars to the knob of the bat between the original eBay listing and the time you listed it.

The crack. Although obviously repaired, the crack is in the exact position on the original eBay bat and your recently listed bat (another fact that allows one to conclude that the original listed eBay bat and your bat are the same exact bat).

The ball marks. There are two distinct ball marks near the markings on the barrel that are the exact same in both the original eBay bat and your recently listed bat (a THIRD fact that allows one to conclude that the original listed eBay bat and your bat are the same exact bat). See attached photo for additional use characteristics that are EXACT matches.

When the bat was used. The original eBay listing says that the bat "was used by Albert Pujols (and broken by him) during the 2005 spring training in Florida." Your description states, "the bat was obtained by a former St. Louis Cardinals employee this past season." Although your description is vague, there is a definite difference in value between a known Spring Training bat and a bat from the regular season. This is deceptive, and should have been revealed in your description.

The crack, part two. In the original description, this bat was clearly advertised and sold as being broken in two pieces (and taped together). Per the final auction listing, it's also apparent that you were the winning bidder - therefore, you KNOW the bat was split in two and repaired.

The pine tar. Based on the photos in both auctions, it appears as though there is more pine tar on your current bat than in the original listing. Many bat repairman add pine tar after a crack is repaired to help mask the repair job. It is possible that this is the case with the bat in question?

Based on the above listed facts, I can conclude:

1) YOU were the winning bidder on the Pujols bat when originally listed on eBay.
2) The bat in the original listing and the bat recently listed by you are the same.
3) The bat appears to have had pine tar added on the handle/near the center brand.
4) The bat has had some stars added to the knob, clearly not added by Pujols.
5) The bat was cracked in two and repaired.
6) The bat was used in Spring Training, not during the regular season.

I would appreciate your comments on the above issues.

I look forward to your response.

Howard Wolf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Howard,

...as for the Pujols bat, it is the same bat. I did realize the error in the markings, which as you pointed out where not put on by Pujols. I added them on the knob in an effort to identify the bat in the future as being repaired (or restored). It was an error on my part to the quick listing I was doing on Sunday evening, plus the use of my template I use for listing bats. You are correct, the stars were not added by Pujols. With the error, I am going to end the auction and state "Error In Listing" as the reason. Since it currently has 137 watchers (according to My eBay), I am sure I will get some response by private e-mail, in which if I decide to sell the bat I will offer full disclosure as the the repair and the markings.

I know if has been commone practice by some jersey collectors and dealers to "mark" a restored jersey. In fact, I have seen a good number of Phillies jerseys will a black sharpie mark on the inside seam near the sleeve opening. This has been attributed to a Phillies collector leaving his mark on these jerseys. Do you know who that person is? I have spoken with other Phillies collectors like Ed Dolan, Wayne Stiles, and Bob Kirk and none seemed to know about the trend. Having handled just enough Phillies jerseys I have noticed it on varios styles from the 1990s in particular.

....As mentioned, the auction will be ended immediately. If I do choose to sell my bat, I will give full disclosure in accompanying documentation. Thanks for keeping the hobby legitimate and me on my toes!

Thanks-

Chris Boyd
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now that Chris as admitted that the bats are the same and that he made the marks on the knob (instead of Pujols himself), my questions remain:

1) In a hobby in which repairs are so accepted, why would you mark a repaired bat in this manner?
2) Why would you type up a description that states Albert himself made these markings?
3) Why would additional pine tar have been added to the bat and not be mentioned in the description?
4) Why wouldn't the fact that the bat was used in Spring Training not have been disclosed in the description?
5) If the bat was purchased in two taped together pieces, why wouldn't you have admitted that when an eBay user specifically asked if the bat was ever split in two?

Regarding Chris' reference to my marking Phillies jerseys:

When I made my team purchase of approximately 600 Phillies jersey, I took two precautions prior to the jerseys entering the hobby. First, I created red colored COA's for each jersey (red paper cannot be photo copied on a standard copier, as it turns completely black). Second, I marked each jersey with a small black dot under the left arm of each jersey. I made these marks so regardless of whether or not the jersey became separated from the COA, I would know the jersey originated from my team purchase - NOT to mark or mask any sort of alteration or restoration. In fact, less than 5% of the jerseys in that team purchase were restored or altered. When a restored shirt was sold, it was documneted on the red LOA as such. The fact that a jersey was restored was always revealed, and also provided collectors with some great Phillies names at a reduced price. Again, all retorations were noted and documneted to the buyer. Once again, EVERY jersey in that team purchase was marked for the reason mentioned above.

Folks, we all make mistakes, especially when attempting to list items on eBay in a rush. If there were one issue, or some minor typo, I wouldn't feel the need to bring these issues to a public forum. Since this Pujols bat is now likely to be sold privately, I thought it was necessary to post this information in a public forum so potential buyers might be forewarned. I encourage forum members to examine the evidence brought forth in this post and raise any questions I might have missed. I would also encourage the input of both Jeff Scott and Rob Steinmetz as well-known Cardinals/Pujols collectors. Although I have a well-documented history with Chris Boyd, this is NOT a personal attack. These issues were brought to Chris prior to my post here, and instead of addressing my concerns point-by-point, he chose to bring up my Phillies team purchase as part of his defense. It's important to note that Chris' Pujols bat was pulled from eBay last night.

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@patmedia.net

BULBUS
02-15-2006, 02:12 PM
I guess he thought enough time went by and everyone forgot about that bat. Good work Howard! Kind of makes it hard to really invest a lot of time and money into this hobby. And I dont think a "template" was used when he listed that bat. Everything describes the bat he was trying to sell. The topper is when he says, "This is the best Pujols bat we have seen to date." Yeh, because you made it that way. Shame on you Chris!

RobSteinmetz
02-15-2006, 02:27 PM
I have received multiple phone calls today from customers to notify me of this thread and to express their disgust with the evidence presented. Since my input has been requested, I'll start by saying that I've had 4 cracked Pujols bats in my personal collection repaired, and have never felt the need to mark them (as repairing cracks is a standard practice in the hobby). Listing error or not, it's very concerning that this bat would have been marketed on eBay as having been marked with stars on the knob by Albert himself. Howard has raised some very legitimate questions that obviously still need to be addressed by Chris. I am hopeful that there is some explanation that will prove that this wasn't an attempt to defraud collectors.

byergo
02-15-2006, 02:33 PM
What does a Pujols "star' mean? Is that a notation for HR's?

Birdbats
02-15-2006, 03:08 PM
Howard,

You were quite thorough in your assessment and your questions of Chris are legit. I look forward to his reply. As someone who has done business with Chris in the past, I hope he can offer a fair explanation regarding this situation.

Looking at this bat as a Pujols collector, the stars on the knob raised a red flag when I first saw the bat. I've never known Albert to add stars to his knobs -- I've seen dots and other notations, such as "Game" and "BP," but never stars. So, I thought that was odd. Nothing else seemed out of the ordinary until I learned of the previous listing.

Personally, I have no problem if someone buys a two-piece bat, repairs it and attempts to resell it. I've done that myself. I also have no problem with reapplying pine tar if the repair makes it necessary. I've done that, too. But, I always let the owner or potential buyer know what I've done (or plan to do). There is no down side to being honest. Such alterations certainly should be disclosed and apparently were not in this case. It even appears the pine tar might have been applied a bit heavier to be more consistent with a typical Pujols-used bat.

I think what bothers me most is the fact that the description said Albert added the stars. I have a hard time accepting that the inclusion of that statement could be an accident.

The kicker is that, properly repaired and unaltered, this bat could have been resold for a nice profit... even if every fact had been disclosed fully.

Just my two cents, since you asked.

Jeff
http://www.birdbats.com

W_EISENHUTH
02-15-2006, 03:22 PM
Howard: Thanks for catching this and for the posting. This seller has obviously been caught red-handed despite his "spin" on the listing. I have marked him off of my dealer list and hope others do likewise. A perfect example of what is wrong with this hobby. Thanks again Howard.

CollectGU
02-15-2006, 03:24 PM
Wow,

I don't think that you can "spin" this, it appears to be outright attempted fraud....

eGameUsed
02-15-2006, 03:39 PM
Howard and others,

As posted by Howard, the bats are in fact the same. I did in fact add the stars as I have done to multiple other bats (including one other Pujols that was repaired). The fact that Pujols does not apply stars to the bat makes this an obvious way for it to be seen in the hobby. As far as it increasing the value, I would think it would do quite the opposite and devalue it (if anything).

Eric e-mailed me asking me about the bat for an "anonymous questioner." I told Eric I would not answer his e-mails if they were coming from someone that wanted to stay anonymous. When I received the e-mail from Howard I address it promptly. As mentioned to Howard, the bat was listed on eBay in a rush as I like to start my auctions on Sunday night, and that is why I used my template. I had no reason to deceive anyone, that is why I pulled the eBay this morning after I addresssed Howard's question. Some may think I was trying to make a quick buck and deceive someone, but that is not the case. I would never try to deceive or sell something for a quick buck as I honestly don't need the money. That is why I make $180,000/year at my "regular job." Poeple can believe whatever they choose, I don't need to convince anyone other than myself.

Now, I could have chosen to ignore Howard and Eric's request, any sell to the last minute bidder that had no idea. I chose to end the item and sell with full disclosure. I could have also fabricated some story to make me look good, but in this case I messed up. Again, that is why I pulled the bat within minutes of responding to Howard and Eric.

In terms of the Phillies jerseys, I had no idea that was you Howard adding the "marker" to the Phillies collection you bought. I had no clue and necver assumed it was you. The only evidence I knew was:

1. Ed Dolan and other major Phillies collectors had no idea of the "marker."
2. You were the only Phillies collector I know I had not asked
3. It is similar to marking a repaired of restored jersey, which is more common than I think.

For whatever reason, Howard has had it out for me since I questioned his Lance Berkman 2004 All-Star BP. I never pushed the issue and decided it was not worth my time to understand where this "third" All-Star BP or any other Majestic BPs that Howward had obtained originated from. I don't collect BPs other than the few Astros ones I had obtained and had no interest in the plentiful supply Howard could get.

Following my bringing the Berkman up publicly, he proceeded to call the Astros and Roger Clemens foundation trying to discredit me. It didn't work!

Since I don't want to end thinking I am trying to pass any blame or change the subject, as mentioend above, I did add the stars. This bat is my property and I can do as I choose! This is no different than Howard adding the "marker" to Phillies jerseys; it is his property and he can do as he chooses. As mentioned, I agree I messed up with errors and planned to add full disclosure when sold.

I don't have any further comment on this issue! Ax for the bat, it has been sold with full disclosure of the markings.

Thanks,

Chris Boyd
www.eGameUsed.com (http://www.eGameUsed.com)
ccboyd@houston.rr.com
713-385-1155

CollectGU
02-15-2006, 03:50 PM
Chris,

How do you explain this quote from the description - "Also, Albert has drawn 2 stars on the knob". Did you forget that you drew them on there and then remembered after Howard called you out on it?

eGameUsed
02-15-2006, 03:53 PM
Yes, that is correct! I am not perfect, I admitted that, I ended the auction. What more do you want me to do. Do you want me to renounce sin for all man, be crucified, die, etc, etc. Too bad, someone already did that for me. All I can do is say I was wrong, which is more than most people do in this forum.

BULBUS
02-15-2006, 04:07 PM
I dont know Chris. Being that Pujols bats are in huge demand and collectors are paying crazy prices, you did a very bad thing. How can people trust you now??? If you would have just fixed the crack and added a small amount of pine tar to conceal the repair, that would have been acceptable. This is not.

kingjammy24
02-15-2006, 04:20 PM
Personally, if it's not an athlete or team marking, I think I would prefer that my game-used items not have any markings from a seller. Ideally, the item should be as close to the condition as it was when it left the athlete's possession. Items changes hands regularly in this hobby. Can you imagine if every seller marked the item with their own little permanent notation? After 15 yrs you receive the item and it's littered with all sorts of seller "graffiti".

At any rate, many (most?) cracks that were severe and were repaired can easily be seen. There's no need to mark the obvious. I can see the crack on the Pujols as plain as day. I can also see it was obviously repaired. If the crack is visible and it's sealed, what else would I think possibly happened to it? I'm aware that it didn't seal itself. The knob need not be permanently sullied simply to state the extremely obvious.

For me, I think the most disturbing part of it is the pine tar. I've looked at both the original auction photo and the subsequent auction photo, and a good amount of pine tar was added. Who added the pine tar? For what purpose?

Jeff Sullivan: You stated you "have no problem with reapplying pine tar if the repair makes it necessary. I've done that, too." Granted, I'm not a bat collector or expert so I may be naive about certain bat-specific practices etc. Why would you destroy an original application of pinetar by putting a new coat on it? The original application was a coat of real Major-League, game-used pinetar applied by the athlete. It saw games, it exhibits the athlete's unique preferences, etc. It's got history to it and meaning. The new coat is nothing but pinetar applied by a seller.
Given that I'm not an expert on bats, could you please tell me what about a crack repair absolutely necessitates a re-application of pinetar?

However this entire story turns out, I suppose the real point at the end of it all is that if you've altered an item, regardless of why, then anything less than full disclosure of these alterations borders on deliberate misrepresentation.

Incidentally, what happened to other "marking" on the original knob? Also, was the "5" on the knob re-traced in the "restored" version?

http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/9035/knob2yg.jpg

Rudy.

Yankwood
02-15-2006, 04:37 PM
Beg for our forgiveness, Dammit! Beg, I say!

Jeff Sullivan
02-15-2006, 04:53 PM
Rudy

You have me confused with Jeff Scott (Birdbats) I did not make any comments at all regarding this bat.

Thanks

Jeff Sullivan

kingjammy24
02-15-2006, 05:00 PM
Jeff Sullivan: Woops sorry! You're both Jeffs and you're both into the Cardinals. Apparently the similarities proved too confusing for me.


At any rate, Jeff Birdbats: that last post re: pinetar applies to you.


thanks,

Rudy.

Birdbats
02-15-2006, 05:30 PM
Rudy,

Regarding repairing bats and reapplying pine tar, I've only had to do it a couple times. Pine tar can come off during the repair process no matter how careful you are -- it can stick to clamp pads or be scraped off while trying to remove excess dried glue. If you're not careful, a bat can end up looking like Steve Carell's chest (post waxing) in the 40-Year-Old Virgin.

Also, if the crack is severe enough, it can require some serious craftsmanship to make a bat whole again. It might even require sanding. I know Fred Lowman, who is the most highly praised bat repair guy around, will replace missing wood with new wood (not filler) -- and that could really stand out if it's in the middle of a dark, tarred area. I e-mailed Fred once about repairing a heavily tarred bat; he replied that he'd remove all the tar, repair the bat and then replace the tar. I personally think that's kind of extreme (and didn't use his services as a result) -- I guess we all have different comfort levels. What's important is that he disclosed his process to me and gave me information to make my decision.

Removing and/or reapplying pine tar is not something you want to do routinely, but sometimes it is necessary -- especially if the customer requesting the repair wants the bat to be restored as closely as possible to its unbroken condition. I'd never reapply pine tar unless it was ok with the owner.

The concept of "restoration" is the key. Bats aren't like baseball cards that are trimmed to be passed off as mint. To many, they're more like museum pieces that are more desirable if restored. If artists can retouch the Sistine Chapel, then why not replace the pine tar on a baseball bat's repaired, bare spot?

Now, if you're applying pine tar just to make a bat match a player's "desired" characteristics, that's a whole different matter. That's not restoration, that's deception. I believe that's the issue to which Howard is referring on this particular bat.

Jeff
http://www.birdbats.com

bagbig
02-15-2006, 06:33 PM
Great work Howard!!!!!!!!!!!! Obviously this guy has been selling fake items on ebay for quite some time. I am never going to bid on his fake auctions again. Thanks again for the good work Howard.

kingjammy24
02-15-2006, 06:40 PM
Jeff,

Thanks for your reply and insight. My 2 bits (as we hijack this thread into a discussion on bat repair):

If I read your reply correctly, a bat crack repair doesn't physically necessitate any re-application of pine tar. That is, a re-application of pinetar is in fact not necessary for a repair to be made.
A re-application of pinetar is only necessary for the aesthetic effect; that is, to satisfy a customer who prefers the aesthetic look of a restored bat.
The pinetar doesn't help seal the crack, it simply helps hide the repair and/or make the bat look more 'original'. A personal choice obviously, best left up to the customer after full disclosure has been given. I understand.

re: the topic of restoration:
"To many, they're more like museum pieces that are more desirable if restored."

Some prefer their pieces restored, other's don't. Personally I don't because for me the attraction to these items isn't aesthetic, it's in their tangible history. There's nothing 'pretty' about a scuffed baseball. The appeal is in the fact that it was the 700th home run for example. To strip off the old hide, which actually flew off the hitter's bat and out of the stadium, and replace it with a new hide, ruins the historical artifact. For me, the same is true for anything else - nameplates, letters, pinetar. It's destroying the original, historical material and replacing it with material that has no significance whatsoever purely for aesthetic reasons.

"If artists can retouch the Sistine Chapel, then why not replace the pine tar on a baseball bat's repaired, bare spot?"

Jeff, there are 2 huge differences with memorabilia restoration and art restoration of the nature given in your example above:

1) High-end art restorers painstakingly ensure that all of their modifications fall precisely within the exact lines and specs of the original. This ensures that any restoration does not alter the original visual appearance in any way. If Michelangelo did a 1.31 mm line which curved 35.42 degrees to the right, then the restorer fills in a 1.31 mm line which curves 35.42 degrees to the right. Somewhat similar to "filling in the lines", only they do it so there is absolutely no visual difference whatsoever between the restorer's work and the original. When you re-apply pinetar, do you re-apply it in exactly the same way, pattern, amount, etc as the original application? That is, does your re-application differ in any way from the original? I would offer that most "pine tar re-appliers" don't apply nearly the same amount of painstaking detail and skill as professional art restorers. I'm not talking about applying a "light coat" or "heavy coat". I mean..if there's an s-shaped swirl that's 3.1" long formed in the original pinetar, do you faithfully re-create a 3.1", s-shaped swirl in the exact same position? I would offer that what pine-tar re-appliers do is a crude job that barely resembles the intricate details of the original.

2) Unlike sports memorabilia restorers, those who restore high-end art aren't doing it purely for aesthetic reasons. It's done when the original is literally falling apart or fading drastically. That is, when the original piece is in real danger of not existing if left unrestored. I would argue that there isn't even a genuine need for crack repair. I have 2 cracked bats. In 15 yrs, their condition has not changed in the least. The crack has not affected their rate of deterioration. Repairing these bats or re-applying their pinetar will not lengthen their life whatsoever. The Sistine Chapel is fading and deteriorating. If it's not periodically restored, it will fade to nothing and cease to exist. If I don't seal a crack or re-apply the pinetar, the bat will not suffer the same fate. The bat repair we're discussing is done purely for aesthetic reasons and I personally don't believe aesthetics take precedence over a genuine piece of tangible history. I'd prefer a cracked bat completely in it's original state to one repaired and with new pinetar. I completely understand though that it's simply a personal preference. Thanks again for your insight.

Rudy.

Birdbats
02-15-2006, 07:02 PM
Rudy,

All valid points. As you note, a lot of it is personal preference. Many people don't like to fix cracked bats, and some won't buy cracked bats in the first place. But, trust me when I say I've seen bats that, if not repaired, might snap into two pieces if handled in the slightest.

This particular bat already was in two pieces, which most people would not prefer. There aren't a lot of bat racks that can accommodate a two-piece bat. Repairing it makes it presentable. Whether you call that aesthetic or necessary, the fact is, the bat is more desirable to most people if restored. And if, in the repair of that bat some of the pine tar came off, many people would prefer to have those spots concealed. Some wouldn't. Only one bat in a hundred might actually need this kind of work -- it should be the exception rather than the rule.

As long as the work is done in the name of restoration and not deception, I don't have a problem with it. It's been suggested that this Pujols bat might have crossed the line, and that's the issue in play here.

Jeff
http://www.birdbats.com

trsent
02-15-2006, 07:08 PM
Wait a second, Rudy, you are now a bat expert?

Even I can't help with this topic, I have bought and sold about 10 game used bats in my life, I am not an expert. I always overheard discussions at trade shows about restoring bats, I didn't think it was an issue since the bats were always sold as restored.

cjosefy
02-15-2006, 07:13 PM
I also wonder about the Game Used Brandon Backe hat up for auction:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Brandon-Backe-2005-Game-Used-Astros-World-Series-Hat_W0QQitemZ8765661007QQcategoryZ50117QQssPageNam eZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


Check out these two purchases made two months ago:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=24655&item=8729562180
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=24655&item=8731129442


Obviously, there's no way of knowing if the size 7 hat bought on eBay turned into the game used hat, but that's why I hate game used hats. They're too easy to fake.

stlbats
02-15-2006, 10:16 PM
What about the fact that a possible buyer asked if the bat was ever in 2 separate pieces and Chris specifically said he did not know.

Come on, this is definately intentional misleading.

Jason

pietraynor
02-15-2006, 11:33 PM
Way too many red flags here. It's a shame, maybe $180,000 a year isn't enough for some people.

suave1477
02-15-2006, 11:39 PM
I got to admit guys i was feeling bad about the way you were bashing chris but after seeing the game used hat ad that was previsouly posted. WOW THAT IS SCARY AND WAY TO COINCIDENTAL, I will definitely NOT take any chances from buying from GAME-USED-BATS

Yankwood
02-16-2006, 12:27 AM
Lock him up, I say.

nate
02-16-2006, 12:51 AM
Personally i'm glad this came up and started an interesting debate about the restoration of cracked bats.

fraudbuster
02-16-2006, 12:52 AM
***post Removed***

eGameUsed
02-16-2006, 09:52 AM
All,

I feel this issue has been elevated farther than I imagined it could. It seems like hysteria to me personally. Apparently I am ruining the hobby for some. Let me state a few brief facts about my thinking on this:

1. The Albert Pujols bat is REAL, not fake. I received the bat and it was a great piece. It was not fake!

2. Whether it was used in Spring, regular season, batting cage, it was a nice Pujols bat. TRUE - I did not diclose that in my listing. This is part of the reason I ended the eBay auction.

3. I did repair the bat with additional pine tar added to the area of repair. TRUE - I did not disclose that in my listing. This is part of the reason I ended the auction.

4. When I received the bat, black electrical tape had been applied to one end of the crack. The bat did appear to be split through, but when the tape was removed, the bat was not in two pieces. I did not want to "break" the bat, so I left it intact and made the repairs to the appropriate areas. One small piece of wood was needed to finish the repair, with minor sanding. Pine tar was added to the sanded area to bring the visual appeal back to the bat. I answered the clearly posted this in the listing as it was a true statement.

5. I did add the black stars (2) to the knob. I did not state that in the eBay listing, rather, said Pujols added them. This was not true and I will admit deceptive in nature. I can't honestly tell you what was going through my mind, but again, all I can plead is a rushed listing and use of my standard format. TRUE - Because of my lack of responsibility in this error, I have not, and will not claim anything other than deception.

6. This Pujols bat was the 13th bat I have added this "marker" to. In my OPINION (opinions can be wrong in the eyes of others), this is a "good" method for tracking items. I do know one thing, if that bat ever shows up on the market again, everyone on this board will know. If readers think this is wrong of me to do, I am sorry. I am not convinced it is a bad thing to do and it has served me well in the past. TRUE - I did not disclose that I added this in the auction listing.

7. I did end the listing! I removed the bat from eBay. I felt this was the right thing to do. I received mutliple e-mails, some of which from forum members, asking to buy the bat. I sold the bat with full disclosure of my adding the stars, repair of the bat, including adding pine tar over the sanded area.

8. As for the Backe hats, I am offended that someone would accuse me or buying those hats on eBay and turning them into "game worn" hats. Brandon Backe signed this hat for me personally on the Astros Winter Caravan. The hats I purchased on eBay were gifts for relatives as they have become very hard to come by. I have been obtaining items from various Astros clubhouse sources for over 18 years. I am truely offended. Do any of you purchase items on eBay for personal use or other means than game used collecting?

What more do you want from me? I don't want people to think I am dishonest. I am 27 year old that has been collecting since I was 9 years old. Even though I am young, I have seen more than most of the people on this forum, have worked for 2 professional baseball organizations, and am now a professional in the energy business.

Howard has had it out for me since I called him on the Berkman jersey. He chose not to address the issue in a public forum. This time is about me! I was asked to be a man and come on here. I am here, willing to answer any questions, and I think I have done a good job. I ended the listing as would have been expected considering the questions that arose. I sold the item with full disclosure and if the bat ever shows up again, you will see it. In a world of thousands of Pujols XBats, Mizunos, and Pujols bats used by other players, this was a REAL Pujols.

I have never sold a "fake" item that I knew about. I have never fabricated an item either. I have never sold an item I have questions with. I have always offered refunds to buyers once they inspected the item.

I respectfully ask for people to not accuse me of selling fake items. No one has presented any evidence that I have done so now or in the past. If I choose to add graffiti to every item I obtain, then that is my choice with my property.

Thank you for hearing me out!

Chris
ccboyd@houston.rr.com
713-385-1155

trsent
02-16-2006, 12:28 PM
You all should be ashamed of some of the comments above. You may not like the explication Chris gave about the bat, but the hat comments are out of line and without any proof - Just speculation.

This is a problem of the forum, children can't discuss the issue, they like to attack the person involved. Right, wrong or so-so, people made comments that are unfair without a complete trial-discussion by all parties involved.

I personally am not a fan of Chris Boyd after comments he made about how I ruin the forum mentioning what strippers are in my bedroom or talking about sports betting without mentioning me by name, but I will stick up for him right now.

Not because what he did was right or wrong, but because immature people made comments are stuck names on Chris that didn't even give him a chance to respond. Also because he was accused of tampering with a game used ball cap with absolutely no evidence against him.

Stand up and be adults people, otherwise we will continue to lose members who may be useful to our forum, even if they have had activity that is semi-unethical. They are needed to come here to defend their activity and join in on other topics.

Please, think about my comments and remember them, even if the user is offended because I like to mention who is in my bedroom.

Bigcatbaseball
02-16-2006, 01:49 PM
The problem caused by Chris altering the Albert Pujols bat and not disclosing those alterations creates doubts about the possiblity that he has or would alter other items that he sells. I have never purchased from Chris and do not know him and I have no reason to believe that he is anything but honest. But, he showed very poor judgment in attempting to sell an item with an undisclosed alteration. Adding any markings or additional pine tar is deceptive and should never be tolerated. However, each of us will have to make up our minds about buying from him or anyone who alters game used items. As an active game used bat collector, I would never buy a bat that had been altered but that is my preference. Some collectors may not care, but they should be informed about the alteration. Presenting an item in an open and honest way is only fair play.

suave1477
02-16-2006, 01:59 PM
HEY EVERYONE I HAVE BEEN READING EVERYONES POSTS AND NO ONE IS SAYING ANYTHING NEW!!!!!

Yes Chris made a huge mistake but everyone keeps spitting out the samething over and over.

For people who were deterred by Chris from what he did, then don't buy from him.

For people who still trust Chris, then buy from him.

But all I see is the passed 20 sometihng posts is everyone saying the same thing of how bad chris is and we should burn him at the stakes. We all know what he did is wrong, but let it go now it is enough. Start a New thread about something positive.

bagbig
02-16-2006, 02:34 PM
Something positive!?!?!?!? This is a serious issue, a dealer who sells hundreds of items is selling fake items. It should NOT be taken lightly!!!!! People have wasted money on his fake products!!!!!!!!!!!!

suave1477
02-16-2006, 02:38 PM
Bagbig thank you for proving my point of saying nothing new and spitting out the same post again!!!

If you are going to post something in regards to this thread, then something new should be brought to light.

I think we all got the idea that we cannot feel comfortable with Chris's items from the first 20 posts.

So as I said before if there is nothing new to be discussed we should start a new thread about something positive!!!!!

kingjammy24
02-16-2006, 03:18 PM
Chris,

Seeing as how you've chosen to answer questions, I was wondering if you could address these:

1) On 02/12, an Ebayer asked you "was the handle cracked and repaired or was it split in two pieces?". You replied: "... I am not sure if the bat was ever in two separate pieces..."

Today you posted saying "When I received the bat, black electrical tape had been applied to one end of the crack...when the tape was removed, the bat was not in two pieces."

If you received the bat and saw that it was not in 2 pieces and clearly had not been repaired, why tell the Ebayer that you weren't sure if it was ever in 2 pieces?

2) On this Forum, you said that you repaired the bat and added pine tar to it after the repair. I'm confused as to why you would say "The repair was done perfectly without disturbing the existing pine tar residue" when the "existing pine tar" was applied AFTER the repair? How could it have been disturbed if it was applied afterwards?

3) was the "5" on the knob touched up or re-traced?


thanks,

Rudy.

trsent
02-16-2006, 03:59 PM
Be careful how you answer, Chris, Judge Rudy is very anal about how you word things. ;)

kingjammy24
02-16-2006, 04:15 PM
Joel, agreed. "The bat was not in 2 pieces" is pretty much the same thing as "I'm not sure if the bat was in 2 pieces". I'm probably just nitpicking.


Rudy.