PDA

View Full Version : Hopefully A Bogus MEARS Letter...



aeneas01
12-21-2008, 10:34 AM
after reading the "2001 Barry Bonds Jersey" thread i followed a link to mike quick's excellent website where he's listed what he considers to be fake bonds jerseys. a 1997 bonds shirt caught my eye because to my untrained eye it looked absurdly suspect yet it had been authenticated by mears.

according to the letter, the shirt was "style photo matched" and compared to "exemplars". as it turns out, the "examplars" the letter refers to is a single 1997 batting practice jersey in the mears database. as far as style photo matching is concerned, the letter references 4 getty images as follows: 270890 (front style match), 296642 (patch style match), 1785376 (nob - short cut style match) and 51537226 (nob - long cut style match).

the photo on the right shows getty image 270890 which the letter points to as a style photo match for the front of the jersey. on the left i've compared the shirt (above the red line) to a 1997 game photo of bonds. it appears that the shoulder seams do not match. further, it appears that bonds never wore a jersey in 1997 with the type of seams shown on the shirt in question. also i'm not sure how the use of getty image 270890 would reveal such a detail.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/bonds07.jpg


the photo on the left shows getty image 296642 which the letter points to as a style photo match for the sleeve patch. what can also be clearly seen in the getty image is that the russell "r" is not present below the patch - yet the "r" is present on the shirt in question. according to mike quick there is a very simple explanation - bonds didn't begin wearing russell shirts until the 2000 season. perhaps this explains why the shoulder seams do not match either. getty, which the letter obviously referenced, returns 83 photos of bonds from the 1997 season and none show an "r" on his sleeve. nor do photos from wire image and the like.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/bonds06.jpg


the top photo shows getty image 1785376 which the letter points to as a style photo match for the short cut nob. the bottom photo, which i also pulled from getty, shows bonds in the same game (same at bat i believe) - i think it's clear that the nob is not a short cut as the letter claims. further, i don't know how the letter could claim that getty image 1785376 supported a short cut nob.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/bonds02.jpg


the letter also states that the shirt is "properly tagged", the size (44) is "correct for the player", the shirt was "worn during the regular season" and that the "combination of characteristics compare very favorably to game photos".

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/bonds05.jpg


...

metsmetsmets
12-21-2008, 12:59 PM
I have no opinion one way or the other on your Bonds post, but I know for a fact that in 1997 (the year MLB wore the Jackie Robinson tribute patch) there were inconsistencies, at least with game used Mets jerseys, concerning the "R" Russell logo that often appeared just below the Robinson patch. I say "often" because the Russell logo was not always affixed to '97 game used Mets jerseys. Sometimes, the "R" was there, sometimes it wasn't.

Compare some era-appropriate Met baseball cards, or scorecard photos, and you'll see right away. Obviously, the Robinson patch would be the dead giveaway pegging the photo to 1997.

kingjammy24
12-21-2008, 07:23 PM
i think it's interesting that russell and rawlings possibly constructed their giants jerseys differently during the same season.

anyway, what i personally took from robert's post and what i think is the most interesting part is how it reveals mears' authenticating methodology.

1) the comparison with a BP shirt is useless. i'm assuming it was done for size. however players will often take BP shirts in a different size (and different customizations) than game jerseys.

2) it's known that when russell began supplying the giants in 1992, bonds stayed with rawlings. mike quick says bonds eventually began wearing russell in 2000. at a minimum, the fact that this '97 bonds shirt was russell and not rawlings should've raised a red flag and resulted in further research.

3) the photo mears used to match the JR patch is utterly useless. at best all it shows is a completely distorted, blurry, half-portion. there are some subtle differences between retail patches, minor league patches, fake patches, and mlb patches. mears couldn't see a damn thing in getty image 296642.

4) the short-cut nob photo is another inane one. it's clear mears possibly couldn't see anything from the photo they cited.

all in all, it's just sloppy, rushed work. reckless actually. apparently, just because an item on a mears worksheet is checked doesn't necessarily mean it's really been verified. whoever did that bonds shirt just wanted to go home at that point and grabbed the first inconclusive photos they found in order to write something in on the worksheet. bushing? yeah yeah i know dave, you've written lots of books about bats. written a single one on baseball jerseys? in response to many of the mears errors pointed out on this forum, troy has said they constitute only a small number of the items mears has looked at. troy, the errors found aren't how many errors mears has made. they're only how many have been caught. with bushing at the wheel on tons of jerseys, one can only imagine how many undiscovered trainwrecks are still out there.

rudy.

aeneas01
12-22-2008, 08:36 AM
anyway, what i personally took from robert's post and what i think is the most interesting part is how it reveals mears' authenticating methodology.

here's the thing - if this letter is indeed authentic, if this is indeed an example of mears' work, then i think it seriously calls into question mears' qualifications, ability and approach as far as photo style matching and grading certain game used items is concerned. and i think the following does as well: troy kinunen (mears) recently stated that mears was unable to photo style match jim brown wearing a lightweight jersey that was recently sold at auction, that mears had "referenced all of the available images". yet i was able to find a conclusive style photo match of brown wearing this type of jersey in a game without really trying. troy went on to say that even clear photos of brown wearing his classic heavy durene were rare, that "less than a dozen" exist. the fact of the matter is many clear photos of jim brown wearing his classic heavy durene exist, not "less than a dozen", and mears certainly did not reference "all available images". and what about mears' photo style matching work on the lambert jersey that's recently been discussed?

as far as the bonds jersey is concerned, one would have to assume the photos referenced in the worksheet represent the best examples mears could find to support their work and claims (i mean why would mears reference the worst?). if this is the case, imo collectors should be very concerned - especially if the photos referenced in the worksheets archived at mears reflect similar work.

i urge forum members to take a close look at the getty images used to support the bonds jersey, the getty images that are referenced in the worksheet. i especially urge forum members to take a close look at the getty image the worksheet points to as support for the narrow (short cut) nob plate. and then explain how mears could possibly consider this honest, professional work.

in keeping with mears' work on the bonds jersey, here are some excerpts from an interview i recently came across - the full interview be found here: http://www.cycleback.com/baseballjerseys.html


April 2005 Cycleback Interview with Game Used Baseball Jersey Expert Dave Grob:

Cycleback: Do experts and collectors regularly use photos to help in authentication?

Grob: If they don't they should. The big thing today is folks wanting to "photo match" their item. I applaud that, but I am not sure folks are doing it correctly. Here's what I mean. The person will usually look at the jersey or bat first and then find are particular nuance in the photo (they stop when they find something that matches). That is backwards and here's why. The photograph represents that item at a point in time. The jersey itself represents the actual the cumulative life of that item. You should pick out a distinct aspect of the item in the picture and expect to see it on the item. If it was on the shirt at the time of picture, it should still be there (not counting light staining that could have been washed out). In addition, folks need to know how to imagery analysis. I have an entire chapter devoted to this in a collectors guide I am working on.

Cycleback: I notice that some modern game used bats and jerseys come with LOAs and holograms from the teams or the players, including Alex Rodriguez, Barry Bonds, Tony Gwynn and Rickey Henderson. How reliable should the collector consider these types of LOAs?

Grob: This goes back to the point I made earlier about players realizing the value of their own bats and equipment. Here is where player's conduct comes into question as well as the folks who handle their business affairs. If a player is or has been involved in taking illegal substances, would they be above with the dubious marketing of their own item? This LOA's are great, but they are not a substitute for doing due diligence to make sure the uniform or bat is what it is supposed to be. As an authenticator, if I don't have any problems with jersey and there is nothing that would cause me to question the players motives, they have value. The other thing to consider, is that if a player is marketing his own items, then he is aware of the value. That being said, there will likely be no real shortage of product out there.

...

trsent
12-22-2008, 10:12 AM
So, if there is a better way, when will a new authention service start that doesn't make errors or mistakes? Why doen't Rudy and Robert get together and start a jersey authentiction service already?

Also, could you two please post praise for something MEARS has authenticated or do you only comment on items you have issues with?

I know - Doom and gloom make for better reading.

Happy Holidays!

aeneas01
12-22-2008, 05:57 PM
I have no opinion one way or the other on your Bonds post, but I know for a fact that in 1997 (the year MLB wore the Jackie Robinson tribute patch) there were inconsistencies, at least with game used Mets jerseys, concerning the "R" Russell logo that often appeared just below the Robinson patch. I say "often" because the Russell logo was not always affixed to '97 game used Mets jerseys. Sometimes, the "R" was there, sometimes it wasn't.

Compare some era-appropriate Met baseball cards, or scorecard photos, and you'll see right away. Obviously, the Robinson patch would be the dead giveaway pegging the photo to 1997.

as someone that doesn't collect jerseys and knows very little about them, i appreciate your point regarding the inconsistencies with the russell "r" sleeve logo during that era. in fact i think it's exactly these sort of inconsistencies that make authenticating game used items so challenging - i know it's certainly true when it comes to football helmets.

but by the same token, these type of inconsistencies should compel those attempting to accurately photo style match a game used item to dig even deeper, especially those that are getting paid to do the digging. i also think a paid authenticator would be grossly negligent if he simply assumed a player sported a russell just because it was known that russell sleeve logos were a hit and miss proposition.

in the case of the 1997 barry bonds jersey that mears apparently graded and authenticated, i think this would be especially true given there are no hit and miss examples - instead there are simply no game photos of bonds wearing a jersey during the 1997 season showing a russell "r" on his sleeve.

fwiw i contacted rawlings and they unequivocally confirmed what mike quick had stated - that although russell did indeed supply jerseys to the giants in 1997, bonds was supplied with rawlings shirts which he exclusively wore until 2000. i was also told by rawlings this is the reason you won't find a russell logo on his shirt during that time and that a rawlings logo was not allowed due to the giants' agreement with russell.

i also asked rawlings about the shoulder/sleeve stitching and was told that the type of sleeve found on the mears shirt is called a "butterfly" sleeve and that the type of sleeve shown in the game photo i posted as a comparison is called a "set in" sleeve. rawlings added that they did not offer a "butterfly" sleeve during that time which is why all of the photos of bonds from 1997 will show him wearing rawlings' "set in" sleeve.


in response to many of the mears errors pointed out on this forum, troy has said they constitute only a small number of the items mears has looked at. troy, the errors found aren't how many errors mears has made. they're only how many have been caught.

i gotta say rudy, i've always found mears' batting average argument pretty weak as well for the very reasons you mention.


So, if there is a better way, when will a new authention service start that doesn't make errors or mistakes?

clearly joel, there is no better way....

----------

mears' worksheet confirming the "jersey style was photo matched" using getty images 270890 (for front of jersey), 296642 (for jr sleeve patch) and 1785376 (for narrow short cut nob plate). signed by mears.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/mears01.jpg


getty image 270890 which mears used for the front of jersey photo match. what, can be concluded from this photo? button count? sleeve cut? lettering trim? what?

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/mears02.jpg


getty image 296642 which mears used for the jr sleeve patch photo match. is this an example of "imagery analysis"?

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/mears03.jpg


and the real kicker, getty image 1785376 which mears used for the short cut nob photo match. as mentioned before, other photos clearly show that the nob is actually a long/wide cut plate. can anyone explain this? is it unreasonable that a collector should expect better from a paid authenticator? is it unreasonable that an authenticator is called out for this type of work?

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/mears04.jpg

...

kingjammy24
12-22-2008, 06:24 PM
"fwiw i contacted rawlings and they unequivocally confirmed..that although russell did indeed supply jerseys to the giants in 1997, bonds was supplied with rawlings shirts which he exclusively wore until 2000. i was also told by rawlings this is the reason you won't find a russell logo on his shirt during that time and that a rawlings logo was not allowed due to the giants' agreement with russell... i also asked rawlings about the shoulder/sleeve stitching and was told that the type of sleeve found on the mears shirt is called a "butterfly" sleeve and that the type of sleeve shown in the game photo i posted as a comparison is called a "set in" sleeve. rawlings added that they did not offer a "butterfly" sleeve during that time which is why all of the photos of bonds from 1997 will show him wearing rawlings' "set in" sleeve."

when you read stuff like this, it just makes things look worse and worse. i mean, robert collect vintage lids purely as a pasttime. mears is getting paid for this. did they contact rawlings? (btw, frankly i'm very impressed that rawlings disclosed that. the big dream of jersey collectors would be for rawlings and/or russell to release their order forms in the same way that louisville slugger released their records. i know that various attempts have been made for the release of these jersey order forms (which would show size, customizations, tagging, and quantity order for each player, team, and year) but none have been successful. i've even attempted to ask russell and rawlings for the forms and my requests went ignored).

"if there is a better way, when will a new authention service start that doesn't make errors or mistakes?"

all errors aren't created equal. there are acceptable errors and unacceptable errors. anyway, my guess is such a service won't come to light because there isn't enough money in authenticating to make it worthwhile. plus, i'd think most smart collectors would realize that the "jack of all trades/master of none" authentication model simply doesn't work. everyone's got their niche and there is no single person who can authenticate all items from all eras from all sports. you can have all the databases and references you want but it's not going to replace human analysis and experience. anyway, now that bushing has completely quit, dave grob only does research and writes articles, who exactly is left at mears to authenticate? is troy doing it all by himself? REA's auction is coming up. is troy handling REA all by his lonesome? ouch. will troy be doing all of the bats for mears as well? should be interesting.

"Why doen't Rudy and Robert get together and start a jersey authentiction service already?"

because rudy doesn't want a drastic pay cut.

"could you two please post praise for something MEARS has authenticated"

dave grob did a very nice job figuring out that willie mays once wore #14.

"or do you only comment on items you have issues with?...I know - Doom and gloom make for better reading"

when's the last time a legit, well-authenticated shirt ripped off a collector for thousands of dollars? we can all have a lovefest or do something infinitely more useful and focus on the items and practices that are ripping folks off.

rudy.

Ozric
12-22-2008, 07:43 PM
Also, could you two please post praise for something MEARS has authenticated or do you only comment on items you have issues with?



Now this is a stretch... Why on earth should someone get praised for doing what they are supposed to be doing and getting paid good money to do so. I get praise from my clients when going above and beyond the realm of what I am supposed to do and not simply for what is expected of me. I think these threads are essential in showing that there are definite fallacies with most if not all of these companies. More information is better, even if the findings are not good... At least an educated decision can be made then.

jppopma
12-22-2008, 09:51 PM
I'm curious what kind of turnaround these authenticators offer. Are they being forced to make whatever decision, or come up with the best they can, in a week or couple days? Not making any excuses for them at all, they name their price and get paid quite well for the job they are supposed to do. If I were to use any of their services, I would want what I pay for.

I do feel that these mistakes are causing alot of trouble in our hobby. Not only to the guy who pays $1,000 or more for a fake jersey...but also to the dirtbag people out there making these fakes. By MEARS or any other authenticator to give a passing grade to their crap, will only give them a green light and more balls to make more and more fakes.

kingjammy24
12-22-2008, 10:26 PM
I'm curious what kind of turnaround these authenticators offer. Are they being forced to make whatever decision, or come up with the best they can, in a week or couple days?

turnaround times depend on whether the work is for an auction house or whether a private collector has sent something in. if it's the latter, i think they'll hold it for as long as they like. if it's for an auction house, i remember some old threads that discussed turnaround times. the details are fuzzy in my memory but i seem to recall that someone "in the know", maybe lou himself or victor moreno or chris nerat (who used to work at AMI), let loose with some info about turnaround times (as an excuse for why lou's work is so shoddy, believe it or not) and the times are beyond ridiculous. it's literally a few days to authenticate hundreds of items. i think even chris nerat once posted a column imploring people to give lou a break because "he only has a few days" to go through a mountain of stuff. of course, none of this addresses why lou agrees to completely unrealistic timelines. it's lou who signs the contracts of his own free will so it's lou who agrees to authenticate hundreds of items in only a few days. he's got noone to blame but himself for agreeing to unrealistic terms. anyway, i don't know the specific dates but i remember they were completely unrealistic. nobody in the world would have a hope in hell of genuinely authenticating that many items in so little time. the turnaround time alone should tell people something's not right. anyway, there are a bunch of threads somewhere on here about the turnaround times. here's one of them:
http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=10015

if some guy told you he'd build you a 3000 sq ft house from scratch in 6 hrs, you'd say he was nuts and walk away. apparently, in this hobby, that sort of insanity will get you an auction house contract.

rudy.

Nathan
12-23-2008, 03:10 AM
So, if there is a better way, when will a new authention service start that doesn't make errors or mistakes? Why doen't Rudy and Robert get together and start a jersey authentiction service already?

Since I believe that we need the amateurs to clear the floor, I would welcome someone with their diligence starting their own service. They're not getting paid for it now and put this kind of effort into it.


Also, could you two please post praise for something MEARS has authenticated or do you only comment on items you have issues with?

I know - Doom and gloom make for better reading.

No, it's because this forum more or less acts as a watchdog for the goings-on of the hobby. Why doesn't anyone praise what Lampson gets right, and why does everyone focus on the negative? Maybe it's because he's supposed to get it right and he's not supposed to get it wrong.

If there are questionable practices anywhere, common sense and courtesy would demand that it be made known. If there are bad items being passed off as good, basic decency would demand that it be made known. If it comes from Lou Lampson, MEARS, Rick Mears, Richard Petty, Tom Petty, Tom T. Hall, Daryl Hall, John Oates, Adam Oates, Matt Oates, Matt Millen, Greg Millen, or Greg Gardner, it doesn't matter.