What would you petition MLB to change with the authentication process?

[jake33]

I was wondering what (if anything) would you as a collector petition MLB (or Michael Posner who is oversees the program) to change about the hologram authentication process?

I don't think MLB would ever allow a fan to show a video or a photo and have MLB change or update authentication that is already in the database. I don't think they would ever entertain opening that can of worms.

Pregame access to the authenticator(s)?

To allow faded holograms to get re-labeled? I just mention that because I have a 2006 and 2003 hologram's serial numbers fading away

Mandated hologram placement on certain items? For example, I have when MLV puts holograms on twill jersey numbers.

Authentication on all jersey/memorabilia cards?

Anything you would want changed?

[Dewey2007]

One that comes to mind for me is the placement of the hologram sticker on game used bats. I wish they would put them on either the end of the knob or barrel so they don't take away from the display quality of a bat.

[300X30]

I just wish they would take some care in how the label is put on. Often the label is crooked or in a weird place.

[frikativ54]

Say "team issued but shows use," instead of just team issued, where applicable.

[jcowboy2001]

As for the faded holograms getting re-labeled. I asked MLB authentication in an email about this and they said that I just needed to sent my item in and they would re-label it and send it back to me. I ended up never sending the item in because I sold it.

[coxfan]

I am NOT in favor of relaxing the requirement that the authenticator must see the actual use. Thus, no fans coming up later with proof, etc. should be allowed except in rare circumstances. The strictness they have now should be maintained.

But I do suggest the following:

1) More precise descriptions. In my thread, "MLB authentication of perfect game" I found some vague descriptions ( eg umpire's cap, without saying if it was the home-plate ump. Or game ticket without saying if it was used.)

2) More accurate terminology. A foul in the dirt isn't a "foul tip". A pitch top the backstop isn't necessarily a "wild pitch".

3) Somebody, perhaps the authenticator himself, should check the MLB.com play-by-play for obvious clerical errors, such as "bottom third inning" when the visitors are batting.

On the whole, though, the MLB authentication program's great! Any petition should emphasize that its value is appreciated, and suggestions are meant only to be constructive.

[jake33]

I totally agree that they should never change that the authenticator needs to see it used in person to affix the hologram.

While it is annoying that some jerseys go out the door as "game issued" that clearly show use, it is probably the safest way to go about it. And it at least verifies that the jersey did in fact come from the teams lockerroom instead of being backdoored through a contact at a manufacturer.

[dplettn]

First things first: My Compliments to Michael Posner and the folks both with MLB and its Teams which have constructed a tremendous program. They make it possible in our passionate culture to attain items safely which help us to memorialize and further our love of the game. The program also extends a rich history for baseball, both at the macro (items with significant team/player relevance) or and micro (family experiences) levels. It serves heritage. It serves grass roots. Other professional sports leagues would be wise to imitate MLB Authentications.

As for ongoing improvement ideas which MLB might assess:

An optional “title” system for direct purchasers of newly issued product. There are relatively easy ways to provide for anonymity among owners, while an authentication search would still indicate that an item’s ownership was titled at the time of original purchase. A title system would serve to mitigate items’ economic transferability after theft. Further, title transference protocols could be a revenue generator and/or provide useful data to MLB. (ie: product placement quality, Secondary Market Pricing Data)

Automated Data Checks for Play-by-Play Accuracy. The authenticators at games do provide independent observers in real time. Their notation for what a play “is” (ie: error vs hit, fielders choice, etc) is subject to clerical and scoring awareness errors. My guess is that implementation of such a technical data integrity upgrade is a priority. Just in the last year, misspelled player names appear have to become obsolete. With play-by-play accuracy though, data processing constraints likely present challenges. If data can be correlated to historical data records on an automated basis, tertiary benefits to automated data corroboration include career data relevance to items authenticated to particular plays. (ie: bat broken on 7th inning pitch by Joe Public. Mike Smith’s 270th career RBI on FC)

Addition of Fee Based Services. Others have brought up the subject of amending items’ authentication records for relevance based on uninterrupted clear video evidence of the same item observed by authenticators. The most relevant consideration here is that standards of absolute certainty can never be breached. Other considerations include the practical scalability and secure ownership of video. Such amendments to an items’ relevance being part of an authentication are currently not considered. Perhaps a future practicality with 100% certainty may someday exist if uninterrupted video of items from use to authenticated play is owned by MLB. For a time-based fee (paid regardless of the outcome), an authenticator could directly review league owned uninterrupted video evidence of an item for relevance amendments during an off-season period. I’ll continue to buy items when I have personal certainty either way. But for many in the hobby (and for future generations) the database entries are paramount to personal knowledge.


My "Tag":

Buying Joey Votto items. I am buying (preferred) and when required by the other party will secondarily consider trading for game used Joey Votto items (balls that are Votto hits or Votto HRs, game used bats, etc). If you have such items I’d appreciate to hear from you, even if you are not intending to sell. I am pretty private and don’t post much of my stuff so if you’d like to know what items you might entice from me for a Votto item I’d love you’ll need to start the dialogue.

My e-mail is plettner@fuse.net (plettner@fuse.net). If you (like myself) collect or want to collect Joey Votto items, please know you can buy direct from the Reds through Jon Cline of Reds Authentics. You can contact him at jcline@reds.com (jcline@reds.com) Reds Authentics’ proceeds go toward the Reds Community Fund. It’s a good cause and certainly a more productive choice than to enrich the small opportunistic reseller(s) who buy from Reds Authentics only to themself remarket it.

[3arod13]

Say "team issued but shows use," instead of just team issued, where applicable.

Agree! I emailed MLB.COM to make that exact point. It's important that they are very detailed in their descriptions. To state an item is "team issued" and no mention of game used, yet shows use, raises many question. In addition, was the item used the entire game? One inning?

[rdeversole]

I agree with points that Frik and Dewey made.

Noting that it exhibits some level of use would be helpful, especially if there were guidelines in place to gauge the level of use present at time of authentication.

The placement of the hologram should be uniform. I have no idea what the Dodgers are doing with their mid-barrel bat holo placement. Also, on 2 piece bats I'd like to see the secondary holo on the knob end or at least backside of the handle - it displays weird when it's on the front.

[mlupo]

I wish the team equipment managers would work with MLB auth. so that every item authenticated states every game the jersey, bat, helmet was used/worn and every pitch that a ball was used. This might not work for bats, but if they only issued 1 jersey and helmet until it was was taken out of use and authenticated this would be an easy fix and great for collectors to know what the player did while using the item(HR, triple, stolen base...).

[G1X]

I do not like the hologram being placed on the number as I find it to be an ugly distraction. Place it on the tail tagging or, prefrerrably, on the inside tagging. I hate having to move the hologram every time I add a jersey to my collection as it can be a painstaking process as well as create questions/doubts if I ever decide to sell/trade a jersey.

Mark Hayne
Gridiron Exchange
gixc@verizon.net

[godwulf]

Stickers on knobs is a bad idea, as inevitably uniform numbers or manufacture dates are going to get obscured. In the case of Sam bats, at least, the same objection applies to barrel ends.

It would be nice if there were an established way to make corrections in the data base; I bought a bat yesterday at Diamondbacks Fan Fest that was listed in the data base as one make (Marucci, I think), and is actually a Sam bat.

While we're on the topic of MLB hologram stickers, I've got a bat that has one sticker on top of another. The data base entry for the top sticker is for when the bat was signed, and I suspect (actually, hope) that the bottom sticker would tell me when and where the bat was cracked. First of all, that's just weird that an authenticator would even do that...but are there any suggestions as to the best way to take the top sticker off without screwing up either sticker, and then reattach the top one, maybe off to the side?

[coxfan]

After I bought a Strasburg-pitched ball from Turner Field on April 3, I checked the number sequence to see what was authenticated from the 5-26-12 game where the ball was from. For the most part I was pleased to see how the game was authenticated. Here are some general thoughts:

1) They considered marketability: Only 14 balls were authenticated, and 13 of those were either pitched by Strasburg or pitched to Bryce Harper. (The 14th "odd ball" was the game's final out.) Authenticators vary widely from one game to another, with as few as 6 and as many as 55 balls being authenticated, depending on the game's importance and what MLB wants to do with the balls.

2) The authenticator hologrammed Harper's HR ball in the game, the third of his career; but only after noting that the ball landed in a secure area short of the stands, was picked up by security, and brought over by Nationals' personnel. It's good that the authenticator documents provenence when he doesn't fully witness the ball.

3) The cracked bats of the game seem to have well-documented and described.

4) A suggestion: the authenticator was vague on "lineup cards", indicating "copies" of these without being clear what "copies" meant. If they're the bullpen cards, the hologram should say so.

5) The authenticators aren't the most knowledgeable fans around, and use wrong scoring terms at times. The Franscisco single in the second inning was wrongly called a double because he took second base on a throw home. (He did double later, but that ball wasn't off Strasburg and wasn't authenticated).
These errors can usually be corrected by checking the play-by-play on MLB.com, but the buyer's advised always to check these things.

On the whole a good job by authentication.