Portland Beavers 1941 Jersey

[hblakewolf]

Based on the outstanding photo style matching capabilities of some of the Forum readers, I challenge one of you to locate a photo of any Portland Beaver (Pacific Coast League) wearing this style jersey from 1941 or later years.

19548

Any assistance is appreciated.

Thanks.
Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@comcast.net

ALWAYS BUYING PORTLAND BEAVERS JERSEYS AND EQUIPMENT FROM 1978-1986. TOP DOLLAR PAID FOR BETTER NAME PLAYERS' JERSEYS. MINIMUM $500. PAID FOR AN ORIGINAL PORTLAND MAVERICKS JERSEY (1973-1977) AND PANTS.

[suave1477]

Hello Howard I hope this helps a bit. I am not sure how your Jersey is attributed to the Beavers of 1941. But I found a ton of team photos and all of them were pretty much consistant with each other of what they wore and none of them seem to come close to the Jersey your showing. And doesn't seem like any of them had portland on there chest with a line under it. The only thing might be possible if you check the 2 young kids at the end of the first Team pic. might of been bat boys. they have what seems to be colored sleeves. Maybe at most your Jersey might be from a Ball boy.

Here is a team photo from 1940 and 1943
http://nwsabr.sabr.org/images/large/BeaversTeam1940Pitching.gif
http://nwsabr.sabr.org/images/large/BeaversTeam1943.gif

[suave1477]

I found a picture of this Baseball card attributed to the 1941 Beavers

https://www.beckett.com/images/itemimages/hendo/hendo48465129.jpg

[hblakewolf]

Although the photos shown are not the same style, Dave Bushing contacted me and noted that included in the 1943 Louisville Slugger yearbook, you will find a picture of the PCL batting champion wearing this exact style shirt.

Anyone have access to this specific yearbook?

Thanks to all for the posts to this thread.

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@comcast.net

[suave1477]

Hello Howard,

I would love to see it too.

Johnny Moore was the batting champion for 1941

Of all the pictures I found of him, I couldnt find one of him wearing a Jersey like this.

[kingjammy24]

howard

i notice this jersey is back on ebay with a revised LOA and new photos added. the MEARS LOA notes the photo of Norbert wearing "this very style of jersey". but of course, he's not wearing this very style. he's wearing a different style. on the mears forum, dave b. stated he felt it's "hard to tell where the grey ends around the neck". anyone who takes one look at the photo can see the red of the sleeves doesn't go up to norbert's collar, as it does on the ebay jersey. there's nothing "hard to tell" about it.
the front is restored so who knows what it looked like before the restoration. so in deeming it a 1941 beavers shirt, bushing looked at a photo in a 1943 yearbook of norbert wearing a different style of shirt, compared it to his restored-front shirt of a different style and then based on the absence of a war patch, declared it a match. can mears find a single image of any portland beaver wearing this specific style of shirt?
personally, i liked the shirt more when troy slapped an A10 on his buddy's completely restored shirt.

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/2500/sillyi.jpg

rudy.

[kingjammy24]

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/2500/sillyi.jpg

rudy.

[hblakewolf]

Rudy-

Do you work for the CIA?

As noted in my original post, "I challenge one of you to locate a photo of any Portland Beaver (Pacific Coast League) wearing this style jersey from 1941 or later years".

I've seen the two photos you posted, and clearly the shirt being offered on Ebay is not the same style. Not only is the area on the shoulders completely different, but the "restoration" is off. The line under the word PORTLAND is wider on the resotred jersey, and the letters are not the same style (compare the D and also the spacing). Likewise, are my eyes playing tricks or does the one photo with the war patch on the sleeve also appear to have trim on the end of the sleeve?

If any Forum reader can match the restored jersey to a photo, please add it to this thread.

Rudy-thanks again.
Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@comcast.net

[vivian]

i guess it's hard to get http://www.thepinoyscandal.net/img/J/S.jpg

[mears]

Rudy,

The Portland Beavers jersey was originally evaluated by Dave Bushing on 12/7/05. At the time of his first evaluation back in 2005, in his notes, he awarded the jersey the A10 grade. An LOA was produced back in 2005 based on Bushing's original notes. The LOA was filed with the 100's of other LOA's filed for MEARS owned items.

Although Bushing had evaluated the jersey, he held the jersey back from public sale as he was looking for a photo style match. The jersey was in his possession since 2005. He never obtained an exact match. The main issue at the time was a question to whether or not the phrase "PORTLAND" was found on Beavers jerseys. The photo Dave referenced was to illustrate PORTLAND was found on Beavers jerseys.

When Dave found the PORTLAND photo, the jersey was submitted to the auction with a reference to the image provided which illustrated the jerseys were produced with the word PORTLAND on the front.

During the processing of the writing the description for the online auction, I personally reviewed both the jersey and the letter. I noticed the jersey had restoration. I contacted Dave Bushing regarding the jersey, and he too had also noted the restoration before he made the final decision to consign the jersey to the February auction. Dave Bushing had left instructions with our data entry employee to downgrade the letter to the A5. This was done before the auction was launched. The LOA was downgraded to an A5 before the auction. The jersey was never represented as anything but an A5. In the lot description, the fact that both the front and back of jersey was restored was clearly noted. The grade of A5 was clearly noted. The fact that the jersey was owned by a member of the MEARS staff was clearly noted. It is irresponsible for Rudy to come to a public forum and state that there was some favoritism from me to Dave Bushing regarding this jersey. No A10 grade was "slapped on the jersey". When posting such a damning statement, it should be expected that the most basic of research such as reading the original lot description should have been conducted by Rudy. Many people read GUF, and these incorrect, sensationalized comments have real negative impacts if left unaddressed.


The jersey was never offered or sold as an A10. If you go to our auction site, http://www.mearsonlineauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?lotid=1024, you will note that the jersey was auctioned as an A5.

The issue of the A10 letter arose when the jersey was shipped. Our part-time worker in charge of shipping pulled the old A10 letter that was on file, not the new A5 letter that had been produced. The jersey was shipped to the high bidder with the old A10 LOA. The winner then listed the jersey on Ebay with the letter we had provided him.

At some point, and GUF member contacted the seller and noted the jersey was sold in the MEARS auction as an A5 and now it had an A10 grade. I immediately contacted the seller, and sent the amended A5 letter, which again, was the correct letter as sold in the MEARS auction. When the Ebay seller was made aware of the error, the auction was immediately ended. The jersey was then relisted with the A5 letter. The jersey was originally sold by MEARS auction as an A5, and at no time did the jersey ever sell as an A10.

I take full responsibility for the incorrect letter being sent, and we have included measures to verify LOA= correct item. Although this was a mistake, again, I must stress the jersey was never sold, offered, or stated to have an A10 grade. If Rudy wants to criticize me for sending the incorrect letter, I will accept his criticism, but I refuse to accept his statement that I slapped an A10 grade on Bushings's jersey. That statement is invalid, as evidenced by the original lot description. Just as I should be more responsible for including the proper LOA with each item, Rudy should also be accountable for his incorrect accusations.

I have seen continued debate regarding the style of the jersey. Available images are quite rare (yes, some images are available, and we have reviewed them), and there are no known images that span the entire possibilities of this jerseys issuance to allow for an exact style match. When Dave first purchased the jersey in 2005, there were no know images available to use of this style of jersey with the word PORTLAND. Within the past 12 months, Dave Bushing did find the images what at least verified the existance of PORTLAND on the front of the jersey.

Due to the controversey this jersey has caused, I have excersised the MEARS Buyers Protection Policy and purchased the jersey back from the customer for his full purchase price. The jersey will remain in the MEARS inventory, not for sale, as a policy sample until more research can be conducted.

Regards,

Troy R. Kinunen/MEARS

Troy Kinunen/MEARS

[kingjammy24]

troy,

thanks for your reply. good to see you posting here. let me preface everything by saying that i understand that ultimately the jersey was sold as an A5 with disclosure of the restoration. for me, that's not the issue. rather it's the glimpse this jersey provides into how MEARS evaluates jerseys and assigns grades.

this is reminiscent of the recent mastro tony gwynn BP shirt. while the gwynn jersey was pulled, what i found more interesting was the fact that the accompanying MEARS LOA said it had been "stylematched via your database". in fact it hadn't been stylematched because there is no such photo of any padre ever wearing that style of BP. someone at MEARS said they'd stylematched it when in fact they hadn't. on the MEARS LOA for this beavers jersey it again says you've stylematched it via your database. in fact, you haven't. MEARS is producing LOAs stating jerseys have been stylematched and they have not been. i find this alarming.

"Although Bushing had evaluated the jersey, he held the jersey back from public sale as he was looking for a photo style match...He never obtained an exact match"

how was dave able to evaluate the jersey and give it an A10 if, at the time, he hadn't even style matched it? that is, dave could find no evidence that the beavers ever even wore this specific style during the early 40s yet the jersey received a perfect A10 from him?

by your own grading scale, it doesn't even warrant an A5. to wit:
Restoration without exact match to original (-1-3)
Professional number restoration with vintage number (-2)
Fading or staining (minor to abused)
Restoration: if restored with all original pieces, from another all original shirt (-2 to 5) (did the resto come from another all-original 1941 beavers shirt?)
with a base grade of 10, you take away nothing for the large stains on the front. you have no idea if the resto is an exact match to the original because you have no idea what an original 1941 beavers shirt looks like. -5 for the resto that surely didn't come from original pieces, -1 because the front team wordmark clearly isn't an exact match as the wordmark seen on the norbert photo; the font is different and the underline is too thick, -2 for a professional number restoration, -1 for the front stains. how is this thing not an A0?

"I noticed the jersey had restoration. I contacted Dave Bushing regarding the jersey, and he too had also noted the restoration"

what do you suppose would've happened had you not reviewed the jersey? dave noted the restoration after you spoke with him but apparently not before he gave it an A10. if he too noted the restoration why didn't he note it on the original evaluation? he "voted against it after he voted for it" right?

"It is irresponsible for Rudy to come to a public forum and state that there was some favoritism from me to Dave Bushing regarding this jersey."

troy, your signature appears on the original A10 LOA. YOU signed off on a resto'd, stained A10 that couldn't even be stylematched. i understand it was eventually changed but how did you even sign off on the A10 in the first place?

you want to talk about irresponsible? your A5 letter and auction description both state the photo shows norbert "Wearing this very style". in fact, norbert is clearly not wearing that very style. it's irresponsible for an authenticator to claim they have a stylematch when they don't. MEARS has no clue what a 1941 beavers shirt looks like yet you've said this thing matches "exemplars". exemplars of what? of shirts from other years? but it doesn't even match those! how did you plan to authenticate this thing? find a photo from 1942 and hope to hell that the beavers wore the exact same thing in 1941?

"..it should be expected that the most basic of research such as reading the original lot description should have been conducted by Rudy. Many people read GUF, and these incorrect, sensationalized comments have real negative impacts if left unaddressed."

you sell shirts like the gwynn BP and this one that you haven't even stylematched yet your LOAs state you have stylematched them. then you lecture me about "basic research"? how do you possibly evaluate a shirt when you have no clue whether the style was even worn? a hope and a prayer? "please god, let's hope the padres wore this style. and we'll say we stylematched it even though we haven't". i realize that photos don't always exist. however, when you have a shirt and you can't be certain that the style was even worn, then you don't sell the damn shirt as a "1941 portland beavers marv owen gamer". this thing requires more faith than believing jesus rose from the dead.

"I refuse to accept his statement that I slapped an A10 grade on Bushings's jersey."

what grade is this letter and whose signature is at the bottom?

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/1478/sillyxyb.jpg

rudy.

[mears]

Rudy,

Yes, it is my signature on the bottom of the letter. But, it is a letter that was corrected. The letter was never intended to be issued. The content of the letter was corrected BEFORE we sold it. A corrected letter was issued and sent. Yes, Rudy, we were leading to an incorrect opinion. Yes, I did sign the letter, which at the time was drafted in error. But, we did retract the letter. We did note the restoration and lower the grade to an A5, which was done before we ever attempted to sell the jersey. You have to acknowledge the fact that although we originally offered an incorrect opinion, the opinion was amended. We corrected our mistake before going public. Again, the A10 grade was never issued. Signed letter or not, it was not intended to be sent. And once again, as soon as we were notified the A10 was posted on Ebay, I contacted the ebay seller, brought the fact the incorrect letter was sent, and asked him to remove the listing. He did this. Again, you want to photo shop and post on GUF a letter that was never intended to be sent, when it was mistakenly sent immediately it was retracted, and yet you want to judge my work and the work of MEARS by a corrected mistake?

Regarding the original signing of the letter, if you note, only my name appears. In the past, both Bushing and my name appears. Dave Bushing authored this letter in 2005. Since the LOA was re-issued in 2009, only my name appeared as Dave no longer evaluated for MEARS.

This letter created a new situation for us, since Dave Bushing authored the original language. As such, you must direct any additional questions regarding how he came to that opinion to him.

I ultimately take responsibility for his work, thus my reason for the buy back of the item for the full price of $269.50. This is the only item that comes with a signed letter by me that the work was done by Bushing, since this item had been under review since 2005. All 2009 letters bearing my single signature (with the lone exception of this jersey) the work was completed under my watch alone. For the record, any letters containing the signatures of Bushing/Kinunen were done jointly by Dave and myself.

And for those that are following this thread, please let me explain Dave Bushings reason for attributing the jersey to Marv Owen:

1. Jersey originated from the collection of a PCL collector. This fact does not add to the authenticity of the jersey on its own merit, but this collector had researched it and also came to the conclusion it was an authentic Portland jersey.

2. The style and design of the Rawlings tag was consistent with 1941 era Rawlings tags.

3. Owens name appeared in vintage ink on the tag.

4. Dave could have been a little more concise with his wording, as the jersey is not an exact style match, but the design of the colored sleeves and the addition of the team name PORTLAND was consistent with availabe images from the relative time frame. No exact image allowing for true comparisons have been made available yet from 1941. This jersey may also have been worn later when Owen was a player manager, as complete images from those seasons have not yet been made available to us.


Rudy, I do not like making mistakes. If I do, I am accountable. Our company has worked out to create a database that we use to render our opinions. The database is not complete, it never will be. I can tell you that it grows and improves everyday.

I have watched your Rudy photomatch items with the aid of Corbis and Getty Image. With no disrespect to your abilities, these are modern day images, that you render opinions on modern day items. Much easier that vintage items that cannot be easily supported by Getty Images.

If I could google the 1941 Beavers and find the image on Getty, we would not be having this conversation. During the pursuit of information for this item, we added images of the 1940, 1942, and 1944 Beavers to our database. We do develop and improve our database, on a daily, monthly yearly basis. Our company has completed thousands of successful evaluations based on the database that we have worked very hard to build. Yet, you are always the first to criticize MEARS for the mistakes that we made, even when we corrected them. You also continue to criticize the database that we have also build. Rudy, we started with zero. I have never publicly stated that we knew everything or that our database was 100% complete with every image of every player that every played the game. What I can say is that after 5 years of building a database, it is the most complete assortment of vintage and modern images assembled. Yes, we have holes in our database. I would pay $100 for a 1941 Portland Beavers road photo, but we still stay committed to add to our database. Rudy, it is your right to criticize MEARS, our database, our auction estimates and anything else that a forum allows. I only post in response of our company, and the database that we built. This forum is read by a wide range of collectors, and I feel the need to balance your critiques with our lists of accomplishments, which in my biased opinion, far outway our errors.

I envision that with each passing year, the holes will close, and we will continue to offer improved researched for those that are interested.
Rudy, judging by your posts, you are not a fan of our company or database, but, I welcome you to build a better mouse trap.

Troy

[kingjammy24]

troy,

for the sake of staying on topic, i'll reiterate that my issue is not what ultimately happened to these items. you caught dave somehow missing a complete front-to-back resto job on his own A10 jersey. you bought back the jersey. all of that is great. my issue is that MEARS LOAs state items are stylematched when in fact they aren't. that is, as a service, you've stated you've performed something that you haven't. MEARS' customers are led to believe their items have been stylematched when they haven't. pretty serious stuff.

1) the mastro gwynn BP: your LOA stated the jersey was stylematched via your database. please provide the image used to stylematch that shirt, as referenced by the LOA.

2) the beavers jersey: your LOA stated the jersey was stylematched via your database. anyone with at least one working eye and half an ounce of brains can see the 1943 norbert photo isn't a stylematch. (maybe that's why it escaped bushing). close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, not in jerseys. again, please provide an image that supports what your A5 letter (and auction description) stated; that you stylematched the jersey.

to show people that these 2 shirts aren't random anomalies, let's toss in the "1993 ruben sierra BP" shirt in mastro's last auction. show me the photo used to stylematch that jersey. i told you about that shirt in 2007. you conceded the error and your response was "BP jerseys from the 1980-90s is one area MEARS is lacking in data." this is the same reasoning you're using now with the beavers data. this is my second issue: MEARS charges customers and evaluates items for which it knows beforehand it lacks the sufficient resources to properly evaluate.

you fail to grasp the idea that if you don't know enough about something, then you don't authenticate it. you lack data in 80s/90s BP shirts yet you continue to authenticate them. you have no idea what a 1941 beavers shirt should look like yet that doesn't stop you from charging to authenticate them anyway. isn't it irresponsible to accept payment to render an "expert" opinion in things you have no expertise in? to authenticate items in which you admit you lack data? lou does it for the money. why does MEARS do it? it's not even common sense is it? why doesn't MEARS do the prudent thing and simply turn items away when it knows it lacks the resources and information to authenticate them properly? by doing the opposite aren't you shortchanging your customers?

i agree that vintage items can be very tough to stylematch but who's forcing you to authenticate these items? if lampson screws up and says "well it's because i don't know very much about the item" is that valid? you're choosing to do it, charging for it, and then turning around when you do a pisspoor job and saying "hey, we didn't have enough data". you talk about your database and how you're growing it, etc. that's great and when you add some solid images of the 1941 beavers then you'll be able to authenticate their shirts. until then, in the same way lampson authenticates pieces he has no business looking at, why do you do the same?

you say that if you could've easily found images of the 1941 beavers on google we wouldn't be having this conversation. well you can find tons and tons of images on getty of the padres during the 90s wearing BP shirts and we're still talking about that. clearly, as evidenced by the modern-era gwynn and sierra BP shirts, the issue is more serious than simply not being able to find rare vintage photos.

anyway, i'd like to see those 3 images. the LOAs on all of them state you have the images and i'm calling your bluff. you're telling customers you've stylematched things and you haven't. i know MEARS knows what a stylematch is so let's see them. to make it worth your while, if you show me you can support your own LOAs and post the pictures you profess to have, then i'll print this screen out and take a picture of me eating the paper. how's that? wouldn't you like to see me literally eat my own words? if you don't have the images you said you have, then i'd like you to explain why MEARS is saying they've stylematched items when they haven't; why is MEARS saying they have images that they don't?

also, if you've got the time, could you enlighten me as to why the owen jersey has absolutely no points deducted for stains despite there being some very large stains on the front? it would help in showing that the bushing-owned jersey didn't receive preferential treatment.

"I envision that with each passing year, the holes will close.."

unfortunately, the problem is you're authenticating items before you've closed the holes. sort of like MEARS' recent effort to investigate whether there were retail versions of mcauliffe shirts after you've already authenticated dozens of them.

do you also understand that it's possible to do the reverse; to first close the holes and then authenticate? if you haven't closed the holes then don't charge folks for an opinion on which you have little to no data. do you understand that you have the ability to turn items away if you don't feel you have the resources to properly authenticate them? the problem with the owen jersey began when you agreed to authenticate it knowing full well you didn't have the necessary resources.

"..I welcome you to build a better mouse trap"

good news, i already have! whenever someone asks me for advice i'm not qualified to give or where i "lack data" i tell them i don't know enough to offer an opinion. ingenius isn't it? try it. i think you'll find your error rate decrease notably. of course, given that i don't charge folks for my opinion and you do, the onus really is on you to build the better trap.

anyway, while i realize the A10 letter never went live, i think the value of it is in what it reveals of what occurs when dave bushing examines his own items. if you hadn't intervened the jersey would've gone forth as an A10 without any mention of the restoration and with the incorrect statement that the jersey had been stylematched. the resto job can be seen within 1 minute of looking at the shirt because the stains on the front go under the "PORTLAND" letters! reminds me of when bushing consigned the brett jersey to hunt without any disclosure after MEARS had made such disclosure mandatory. it took dave grob intervening on that one. why does it always seems to require you or grob catching bushing with his hand in the cookie jar in order to rectify things? wouldn't it be nice if bushing had the sense to just do the right thing on his own without being rapped on the knuckles by you or grob? the original A10 is what the jersey would've been had you not intervened and that's frightening.

speaking of bushing, now that he's "retired" from mears and has stated that he no longer performs authentication services, how does MEARS authenticate bats? bushing was the only MEARS member with access to the LVS records. if he's no longer authenticating for MEARS then how does MEARS authenticate bats? are you guys authenticating bats without access to the LVS records?

i look forward to your posting the images your LOAs have reassured customers that you have. i also look forward to learning why MEARS evaluates items for which it knows beforehand it lacks sufficient resources to authenticate properly. your buyback guarantee is great but it has nothing to do with those 2 serious issues.

rudy.

[mears]

Rudy,

To answer your questions, the Ruben Sierra jersey was a MEARS mistake, which thanks to your head up was pulled from the auction. The Tony Gwynn was also a MEARS mistake, which was pulled from the auction. Both were BP jerseys, which we have less available images then standard game worn jerseys. In hindsight, maybe we should not have offered opinions on either of these batting practice jerseys. Yes, MEARS did make the mistake on these two items. We have also gotten 1,000's more right during the same time. I thank you for bringing these to my attention, and if other collectors have items that may have been improperly evaluated by MEARS, by all means, please bring them to my attention.

It is your stated opinion that MEARS should not offer opinions on items such as those. My policy has been to evaluate as many items as possible, not for monetary purposes, but to build the database. If we authenticate a Gwynn, then later on 3 commons, we are building our database. If we authenticate the commons and later find the Gwynn was incorrect, we buy it back. Although mistakes are costly, we have not had to buy back an amount of jerseys that have put our company in financial straits. I have found that over time, our mistakes have been very mimimal, and the buy back costs managable.

When we originally gave the opinion on the Gwynn, we obviously thought it was correct. This was a case that we had not examined an actual example from that year prior. As a 5-year old company, we have not seen every item. But, with each passing year, our database grows, more comparisons can be made, and we can weed out bad data. This only occurs through experience. I hope that some day we will have the experience and the database to contain examples of all items that we have evaluated.

We do not like to make mistakes, if we do, and a customer is found to have purchased the jersey which is not as described, he will be protected by the MEARS buyers protection program. With specific reference to the McAuliffe jerseys examined by MEARS, if they are proven to be not as described by MEARS, we will buy them back, every single one, as per the terms of the MEARS Buyers Protection program.

Part of the problem is our worksheet template was designed for game worn jerseys, and we use it for batting practice jerseys. Our data entry person inserts the facts from the worksheet into the final LOA. In some cases, such as batting practice jerseys, we should be more concise in our answers.

I will use your post as a training excerise to make sure that in the future when we are evaluating items such as batting practice jerseys that we are more careful in our style match references.

Since the use of the term style match and our reference to it is important to both you and other collectors, I will make sure that our letters more accurately reflect how we reference our examples, and in instances where references cannot be found, I will make sure that is clearly stated. For future evaluations, that should eliminate situations like the Sierra and the Gwynn, and hopefully eliminate any other future mistakes.

With respects to game used bats, MEARS has access and copies to all of Dave Bushings records. I accompanied him on all of his original trips to the Louisville Slugger factory and personally worked with him to make the master set of H&B factory records used by Bushing and MEARS.

In addition to the factory records, over the past 10 years, I have purchased photos of players with bats, dealer catalogs, auction catalogs, reference books, and thousands of other items of information related to game used bats. We have continued to add to the H&B records on a consistent basis. All of these records will be available to MEARS members and made accessible for individiual research once our new offices are opened this spring. (May 1st goal).

Regards,

Troy Kinunen/MEARS

[kingjammy24]

"When we originally gave the opinion on the Gwynn, we obviously thought it was correct."

based on what? the fact that it had an "SD" logo and a #19 on the back? this is my entire point: without a solid stylematch, you have no baseline.
what you have could be a salesman sample, prototype, minor league shirt, college jersey, who knows. troy, every grade from A5 to A10 requires a basic stylematch right? yet you didn't have one on gwynn, you didn't have one on the sierra (A8) and you didn't have one on the beavers shirt (A5).
if i peeked into the MEARS database, how many LOAs would i find that said the shirts were stylematched but they really weren't? it's either stylematched or it isn't. the LOAs should be truthful in that regard.

"Part of the problem is our worksheet template was designed for game worn jerseys, and we use it for batting practice jerseys."

irrelevant. a stylematch for a BP shirt is the same as a stylematch on a game jersey. saying you matched something when you didn't is "not good" regardless of the item. the issue is misleading LOAs and authenticating items without confirming the correct style. you can apply those issues to any items.

"Since the use of the term style match and our reference to it is important to both you and other collectors.."

isn't it important to you/MEARS? this isn't about some semantic term. it's about the fundamental requirement on your end to confirm the proper style of an item in regards to the year/team/player. authenticating 101.

"in instances where references cannot be found, I will make sure that is clearly stated."

bingo. if you didn't stylematch it, then don't say you did! if you couldn't stylematch it then say as much. isn't this common sense? if a stylematch cannot be found, it's hard to see how the item doesn't become "unable to authenticate". if you can't confirm the style, then the tagging, fonts, etc., become useless. everything follows the style.

the implication that bushing's items receive favorable treatment drew criticism from you yet this is the second bushing-owned shirt now with large, visible stains that had no points subtracted for those stains. (the other shirt being the krauss flannel). you can keep calling them mistakes but when they coincidentally continue to be in bushing's favor, it's hard to believe. where are the mistakes that gave an A5 to one of dave's shirts when it should've really been an A10? show me some of those.

rudy.