Talk about a photo match for James Loney bat...

[brianborsch]

Check this bat out. It HAS to be the bat in the picture as you can see the ball amrk on the EXACT spot from this at-bat (and a few ball marks from other at-bats not photographed). Check the rack mark coming down into the BWP logo area. It is exactly the same as the rack mark on the GU bat pics. Pretty cool huh?

1132

1133

1134

1135

[suave1477]

Brian in my personal opimion that is really not a photo match.

How can you say that is a photo match when you cant barelky if any see markings on the bat distingushing that this is the exact bat, when the picture is not a 100% at the end of the bat. The picture stops short on the barrell and you cant see any markings?

I dont think thats really a photo match.

[CollectGU]

I'd have to agree with Suave - not a true photo match at all....

[brianborsch]

Look closely at the bat in the pictures. There is a rack mark (hard to see because the bat is in motion but if you look at the bat photos and then at the bat in the action photo you can see that exact same rack mark. It has the EXACt same curvature. And then if you see where the ball is hit with the bat in the pic, there is a ball mark in that exact same spot on the bat in the pic. I have the bat, so I can see the whole bat.

Loney used this bat just before he got sent back down to the minors. But now he is tearing it up! He may have to move to OF though.

I Garauntee this is the EXACT same bat. What do others think? Should I post other picture of the entire bat? Can y'all see the rack mark I am talking about?

[brianborsch]

Clearly the hit in the action pic would have left a mark on the bat. If you look at the bat pics there is 2 ball marks in that area, and if you use deduction looking at the action pic and the still bat pics you will see that it is accurate. No question the bat in the action pic is a BWP two-tone bat.

I don't know, seems pretty clear to me.

[brianborsch]

Here, I have marked what I am talkin' about:

1141

1142

[CollectGU]

Still not a photo match..Just my opinion...What do others think...

[R. C. Walker]

No match at all.

[brianborsch]

Can you see the rack mark? The chance of the same brand of bat in the same color getting the same type of rack mark with a ball mark right where the ball is hitting in the action pic is next to impossible. Right? Anyways, with that pic it proves that this bat was DEFINITELY used by Loney in his first callup to the bigs.

[sportscentury]

Brian,

I think what folks are saying is that they just don't see it. I see what you're talking about, but the photo evidence is nowhere near enough for me to be confident that this is a true match. Could the bat be the one in the photo? Most certainly (perhaps even probably), but I think the title that you assigned to this thread set readers up to expect something very different than what was presented. It's a great bat and you may have a photo of it in use, but it is darn hard to tell. You used the word "guarantee" in your earlier post. Sometimes a collector gets so excited about an item that he can see and guarantee things that others cannot.

Again, great bat and nice photo ... but it is hard to tell if it is the same bat. As LTC Dave Grob has said many times, it is very, very hard to definitively photo-match an item (not a direct quote, but a sentiment that I very much agree with). I appreciate your enthusiasm and diligence.

Reid

[JETEFAN]

The Ball Hit Much Closer To The Center Brand Than Circled, Just My Opinion!

[suave1477]

I have to agree with JETEFAN the photos from Getty and your photos of the bat show that it is not an exact match.

Even though it is similar its not an exact match.

1) If you look at the rack mark in the Getty photo the mark lightens up wat before the brand stamp.
In your photo the rack mark is a lot dark and closer to the brand stamp.

2) If you look where the ball is hit in the Getty photo it shows the ball being hit a closer to the Bran Stamp.
Your photo shows a ball mark further away.

That is my opinion from the photos you have provided which cleary shows its not a match.

[brianborsch]

The rack mark is hard to see because the bat is in motion and there is a glare on the bat from light. You can see thought that the rack mark curves exactly like this one. And NO the ball is not hitting right next to the logo. My circle was to circle the rack mark. If you look at where the ball hits and figure for the bats forward motion and how that affects the ball and it's placement, it actually works out exactly to the spot on the bat where there is a ball mark.

I bet if you could get a scientist to come in and assess the probability they would say it is rather high that this is the exact bat.

I will get a subscription to mlbtv and watch this game and the subsequest games. Hopefully I will be able to get more proof there as this is the only photo from Getty. They only show him up to 4/11 and he played until 4/20 or so.

[brianborsch]

The actual total ball mark is close to the center logo. One thing to consider also is that with the bat at that angle in the action pic, where the ball is hitting may seem just a little closer to the logo than it is.

Send me your email and I will email you a good pic. For some reason, I can't get my pics small enough to post on here. The pics I have already posted are from someone else's site.

[suave1477]

Brian first of all we can see the bat juts fine by the ones you posted we dont need any more yours are clear.


Second of all you said it yourself a scientist could come in and say there is high probability that this is the same bat. Then that means its not a photo match.

A PHOTO MATCH IS WHEN YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE EXACT GAME USED ITEM WITH INDICATING MARKINGS, SCUFFS, TEARS, BALL MARKS, RACK MARKS AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT CAN COME FROM USE THAT SHOW IN THE PICTURE AND ON THE BAT WITH OUT QUESTIONS.




I bet if you could get a scientist to come in and assess the probability they would say it is rather high that this is the exact bat.
.

[brianborsch]

Well for me it is without question. I see the rack mark with the same curvature and I see the ball mark which was made from the impact in the picture. I think it is pretty clear. But for those of you who needs like 20 different pieces of evidence, and can't see that the mark is indeed in the exact spot where the ball is hitting we practically need Loney himself to say it is what it is. And even then you may not believe him.

Like I said I will go to mlbtv and try to get some screen captures. Wish me luck!

Brian B

[brianborsch]

Suave,

You said it yourself:

"A PHOTO MATCH IS WHEN YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE EXACT GAME USED ITEM WITH INDICATING MARKINGS, SCUFFS, TEARS, BALL MARKS, RACK MARKS"

The rack mark is there and the ball mark from him hitting the ball in the pic. AND obviously the pics are NOT clear if people are saying the ball hit closer to the brand mark then on the actual bat. Its the same distance if you look at the bat turned showing the ENTIRE ball mark.

Cheers.

[Yankwood]

Gene Rayburn wouldn't even call that a match.

[suave1477]

Brian you said we need 20 peices of evidence, NO we just need 1. Just because you feel that the pic is the same one showing that be used doesn't mean it is unless you can cleary see it. WHICH YOU CANT!!!

So far every member here that has spoken out has said its not a photomatch but yet you insist it is. If your comforable with it then our opinions dont matter.

So it is up to you to take our advice and realize what it realize is or look at it the way you want.


Here is a quick example since yours is so clear to you its a photomatch.
What wouls stop me from being able to make up a bogus bat and say thats the photomatch to a picture of my bat. I can get a bat take a few whacks with a ball get it close enough to make a ball mark with your picture and then make a similar rack mark. With your picture I would have a photomatch too ACCORDING TO YOU!!

[bat_master]

Suave/Jason:

In my opinion the biggest reason you get in so many fights on this forum is your inability to just let things go. If he believes it is a photo match then there really is no amount of explanation that will change his mind.

I just wish that you would stop making posts about topics that don't need further discussion. Only my opinion of course.

Just my two cents,

Tim Byington

[suave1477]

batmasters actually I was done, just trying to educate someone and help them realize what they.

As I also stated in my last post if he is comfortable with what he has then our opinions really dont matter.

As far as arguments there is only one person on here I have truley argued with. So that point is VOID!!


Hey like you said your just sticking your 2 cents in!!!

[both-teams-played-hard]

Gene Rayburn wouldn't even call that a match.

Dumb Deloris is so dumb....
How dumb is she?
She's so dumb that she tried to light her cigarette with a photo "match"...

[Yankwood]

:D
Dumb Deloris is so dumb....
How dumb is she?
She's so dumb that she tried to light her cigarette with a photo "match"...:D Very Good! By the way, who is Jim Loney anyway? Is he related to Bill Loney?

[brianborsch]

So maybe the bat isn't "photomatched" by the definition in the GU collecting industry, but there seems to be a lot of duplicity in this conversation.

Suave states that someone could get an identical bat put identical rack marks and hit a ball to put ball marks in identical places. If that's the case then even a truly "photomatched" item can be faked. So there is never a chance for a truly garaunteed photo matched item.

My reasoning (and I am sure a lot of you can agree with this) is it is a certain brand of bat in a certain color with the player's name and team branded into it. (According to BWP they will only do this if the player himself or his rep orders the bats and Loney seems to only use BWP nowadays). Second, there is a pic with what looks like the exact same rack marks showing a ball hitting in a certain spot on the bat and on my bat there is a ball mark that was clearly a solid connection. I think the chances of someone faking that is pretty slim if impossble. Professional players would have a hard time having a ball hit an exact spot on a bat, what to speak of some amatuer schmuck rip-off artist.

Yeah, it probably isn't 100% certain based on evidence that it is indeed the bat in the pic, but nothing ever is. Just because there is "reasonable doubt" doesn't mean the bat wasn't used by Loney in that pic. Hell, there was a reasonable doubt in the OJ case and he got off even though he did it!

What to speak of the many people who go to jail and get out of jail unjustly.

Anyways, just my 2 cents on the fabled "industry" we are all a fan of.

[hblakewolf]

I just took a look at the photos in question and have no idea how anyone can claim this is the bat in question.

All the back and forth on this issue-enough! If a jersey has pinstripes, it can be photo matched by locating the #'s/NOB, Logos, etc near the pinstripes. Likewise, a marking, stain, etc. can also allow an item to be photomatched.

What am I missing here on this bat in question? Sure, there is a chance this MAY be the bat, however, I see no way ANYONE could claim a photo match based on the phtos posted here.

The end.

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@patmedia.net

[sportscentury]

I just took a look at the photos in question and have no idea how anyone can claim this is the bat in question.

All the back and forth on this issue-enough! If a jersey has pinstripes, it can be photo matched by locating the #'s/NOB, Logos, etc near the pinstripes. Likewise, a marking, stain, etc. can also allow an item to be photomatched.

What am I missing here on this bat in question? Sure, there is a chance this MAY be the bat, however, I see no way ANYONE could claim a photo match based on the phtos posted here.

The end.

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@patmedia.net

On that note, I am locking this thread.

(Just kidding you, Eric).

[Swoboda4]

Not a clear cut match. Comfort level up?-definitely. I see the line mark on the bat and the similar one(at the same spot)on the photo)if it was my bat I would feel good. I was expecting better when I opened the thread, Then again how many bats does Loney have with a line mark radiating towards the barrel from the top portion of the llabel? By the way,Tim(batmaster)I mailed payment for the Relaford bat today.

[brianborsch]

Praise the Lord! EXACTLY what I was thinking. I made the mistake of mis-titling the message as I wasn't clear on the proper definition of photo-matching.

But if you consider all the details it adds up to being pretty sure about it. Thank you.

[Swoboda4]

If you have AOL drag the photo to the top space bar near favorites and release right click. On AOL photomanager increase photo to 200% and Decrease photo contrast. Still not great but you can SLIGHTLY make out the elongated "S" curve(low near the label,arching up towards the barrel). Now I'm going to stop at this point before everybody starts thinking I can also see canals on Mars. (WARNING:For Comfort Level Purposes Only)

[suave1477]

Swoboda I could have used you years ago for my science projects when I was studying uranus lmaooooooooooooooo:p :D

Im sorry man I couldnt resists just jokes no harm intended

[Swoboda4]

suave1477-none taken. Slow night at the Forum.

http://pro.corbis.com/images/42-15604222.jpg?size=67&uid={d6a0b122-8fae-473e-bda3-ea51e06b2950}

[BoneRubbedBat]

Swoboda,

Doesn't it bother you that Suave was studying Uranus? LOL

[suave1477]

Bonerubbed i dont think he caught that part shhhhhhhhh dont say anything lol lol