1996 Alex Rodriguez Game Used & Signed HR #15 Bat

[joelsabi]

it is what it is. that certificate you were provided is to specific to be any other game than specified. i just wonder what happen to the original certificate. that would have been my very first question.

[3arod13]

it is what it is. that certificate you were provided is to specific to be any other game than specified. i just wonder what happen to the original certificate. that would have been my very first question.

Joel,

What do you mean "originial certificate?"

This could easily have been a bat that Arod signed, then someone at a later date sent it in to AROD Authenticated for authentication.

Tony

[3arod13]

Regardless even if the Sox and Mariners game shows it to be the bat, the COA and the inscription on the bat is wrong. I wouldnt even worry about finding that game, its allready dead wrong. I would contact who you can and try to get some answers.

The reason I want to verify the game with Boston at Seattle on 31 May 1996, is because that is a possibility.

Arod could have signed the bat in 1996 and meant his Career HR #15, which he hit it 1996. However, when someone sent it in to AROD Authenticated for authentication, they may have assumed he meant HR#15 of 1996. Then looked up where he did that, prepared the letter accordingly, and Arod signed it.

I have to give Arod every opportunity. This is a possibility and I have to check both HR #15.

I will remain positive about this until I have solid factual proof.

Tony

[3arod13]

I received the DVD from Canada today. There is no question thta Arod hit HR #15, 20th of his career of Erik Hansen in Toronto with a Louisville Slugger.

If anyone has a program that can get clear closeups from a video, let me know. Or maybe I can find a website to post the video for all to see.

I now have 100% solid proof. This is truly unbelieveable!!!

[whatupyos]

Tony:

I hope something can get resolved for you. This has got to be a shame, especially with all the extra foot work that you've had to do. I wish you luck in getting this matter resolved in your favor.

Aaron

[joelsabi]

Joel,

What do you mean "originial certificate?"

This could easily have been a bat that Arod signed, then someone at a later date sent it in to AROD Authenticated for authentication.

Tony

i find it odd that this bat doesnt have original papers, that only after he was with the ranger did the person find it necessary to get papers. unless this was a gift i dont see why this bat doesnt have papers or a story behind how it was obtained.


for some reason i was thinking that this was originally sold in scd and would there have papers. correct if i am wrong.

[kingjammy24]

tony

you said you've "owned this bat for the past 5 years." yet the PSA/DNA cert on it is for a mastro dec 2004 auction. 5 yrs past that auction date would be dec 2009, which is next year. when and from who specifically did you purchase this bat?

i'm fairly certain "arod authenticated" launched in 2004. at that time, arod was already on the yankees. not sure why the cert says "texas rangers".

if the bat had a legit "HR #15 1996" inscription, why would someone send it in for authentication years afterwards? they hoped that if they sent the bat in 7 years after the HR occurred, that arod would remember the very bat? if it had the inscription, then what's left to authenticate? if they thought the inscription and autograph where legit then the bat was already authenticated by arod. given the very close proximity of when "arod authenticated" likely issued the cert (summer 2004) and the consignment deadline for the mastro dec 2004 auction, i'm guessing someone wanted to boost the provenance for a higher hammer price. too bad the SCDA letter isn't dated. i'm wondering if it was ESM that consigned the bat to that mastro dec 2004 auction.

rudy.

[joelsabi]

Tony,

Looking at the photos of arod hr bats, it appears consistant that the number noted on the bat refers to the season # instead of the career numbers. Lately tho, with milestone bats arod adds a inscription "career" when the number is a career total.

[3arod13]

Regardless even if the Sox and Mariners game shows it to be the bat, the COA and the inscription on the bat is wrong. I wouldnt even worry about finding that game, its allready dead wrong. I would contact who you can and try to get some answers.

What? If the bat is proven to be the bat in which Arod hit Career HR #15 in the game between Boston and Seattle on 31 May 1996, then the there's nothing wrong with the inscrption at all. Only Arod's LOA.

Arod signing it, "Alex Rodriguez HR #15 1996" easily makes sense if Arod was referring to his career HR#15.

Name: Alex Rodriguez
HR: #15 (15 of his career)
Year Hit: 1996 (hit it 1996)

Just because he didn't write "Career," doesn't make it wrong.

Tony

[3arod13]

tony

you said you've "owned this bat for the past 5 years." yet the PSA/DNA cert on it is for a mastro dec 2004 auction. 5 yrs past that auction date would be dec 2009, which is next year. when and from who specifically did you purchase this bat?

i'm fairly certain "arod authenticated" launched in 2004. at that time, arod was already on the yankees. not sure why the cert says "texas rangers".

if the bat had a legit "HR #15 1996" inscription, why would someone send it in for authentication years afterwards? they hoped that if they sent the bat in 7 years after the HR occurred, that arod would remember the very bat? if it had the inscription, then what's left to authenticate? if they thought the inscription and autograph where legit then the bat was already authenticated by arod. given the very close proximity of when "arod authenticated" likely issued the cert (summer 2004) and the consignment deadline for the mastro dec 2004 auction, i'm guessing someone wanted to boost the provenance for a higher hammer price. too bad the SCDA letter isn't dated. i'm wondering if it was ESM that consigned the bat to that mastro dec 2004 auction.

rudy.

Rudy,

My error. It was my guess-timation when I bought the bat. I understand everyone's lack of trust in everything Arod signs. I will be satisifed once I find the video or video clip of Arod hitting career HR #15 in Seattle at Boston.

If it does prove he did hit career HR #15 with a Rawlings bat, then I am very satisifed. If this is the case, then I believe the error in all this is with AROD Authentic.

I believe the bat was sent it to AROD Authentic for authentication. It was then that AROD Authentic staff assummed the inscription was for HR #15 in 1996, researched where that occurred, prepared the LOA, and Arod signed it. That's what I believe at this time. I think we can all agree that Arod didn't do any research on this and just signed the LOA, trusting AROD Authentic staff.

I slowed down the video from the game in Seattle. As Arod is bringing the bat back to swing, you can easily see what looks like a big portion of the white ring, which is on a Rawlings bat. For me, this keeps my hopes alive. If proven not to be a Rawlings, then my work is done and I will provide the prove and facts to Arod. It will then be left up to Arod in how he addresses this matter.

Regards, Tony

[chakes89]

If the bat is proved to be fake (for lack of a better word) how can you be so sure that any of this will even be seen by ARod?

[bigtruck260]

If the bat is proved to be fake (for lack of a better word) how can you be so sure that any of this will even be seen by ARod?

Enough people from the industry come to GUU for inside info - it will eventually get back to someone involved that the bat is causing concern...Maybe not A-Rod himself, but certainly someone that knows him.

[metsbats]

Tony,
email it to me and I will see if I can isolate it using Adobe Art Studio.
Tom


Tony,

Can you please email me the video too?

Thanks
metsbats86@aol.com

[cjw]

"If proven not to be a Rawlings, then my work is done and I will provide the prove and facts to Arod. It will then be left up to Arod in how he addresses this matter."

Don't get me wrong...I hope that this works out great for you and have contacted the Jays Team Photograper to aid in the search, but I wanted to mention that the thought of making this into a big media story or even something that ARod might handle/care about personally, is a little far-fetched. One bat authenticated in error isn't going to bring out the media hounds in search of justice.

It may well be determined that people in his "'circle" have made a mistake. Arod pays them (or they are paid through association with him in his business dealings) and they will hopefully make this right for you. Arod won't blink an eye, because he won't hear about this directly, and I am pretty sure that even if he does, he will do more that direct someone to assist you?

I realize you are a great fan of his, and deserve better than to be mislead on this costly purchase, but let's put this into perspective. The industry is rife with errors, forgeries, mistakes, half-truths etc. Major purchases must be researched fully before being made, or the buyer beware...and the buyer then may argue with the company, the BBB or the courts to seek restitution.

[3arod13]

"If proven not to be a Rawlings, then my work is done and I will provide the prove and facts to Arod. It will then be left up to Arod in how he addresses this matter."

Don't get me wrong...I hope that this works out great for you and have contacted the Jays Team Photograper to aid in the search, but I wanted to mention that the thought of making this into a big media story or even something that ARod might handle/care about personally, is a little far-fetched. One bat authenticated in error isn't going to bring out the media hounds in search of justice.

It may well be determined that people in his "'circle" have made a mistake. Arod pays them (or they are paid through association with him in his business dealings) and they will hopefully make this right for you. Arod won't blink an eye, because he won't hear about this directly, and I am pretty sure that even if he does, he will do more that direct someone to assist you?

I realize you are a great fan of his, and deserve better than to be mislead on this costly purchase, but let's put this into perspective. The industry is rife with errors, forgeries, mistakes, half-truths etc. Major purchases must be researched fully before being made, or the buyer beware...and the buyer then may argue with the company, the BBB or the courts to seek restitution.



I'll put my trust in Arod. I believe if Arod, if presented with proof that in both game footage he niether hit HR #15 in 1996, as stated in his LOA signed by him, or even Career HR #15, I believe he will address the matter.

Am I naive? Maybe. Am I too trusting of a person? Probably.

The LOA signed by Arod is to specific for him not to address, if found not true. Whether AROD Authenticated staff screwed up or not. Arod signed it and I believe if he is aware, with video proof, he will want to make it right. I have faith he would do the right thing.

I know many don't like Arod. That's fine. I will still put my trust and faith in him doing the right thing.

It's not like this bat was authenticated by PSA, then found not to be good. This bat was authenticated by AROD Authentic and signed by Arod himself.

Again, no matter how many people hate Arod, I have to believe if he is aware, he will make it right.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

Here's the link to the video I received from seattle. Boston at Seattle
31 May 1996.

Be patient, it takes a bit to download (it's free)

When arod brings the bat back, you can see bright white on the bat. Could be a Rawlings, but not enough is there. Sad part, you can see griffey's full bat...lvs.

Download link: http://rapidshare.com/files/176465008/VTS_01_1.VOB (http://rapidshare.com/files/176465008/VTS_01_1.VOB)

[cjw]

I'll put my trust in Arod. I believe if Arod, if presented with proof that in both game footage he niether hit HR #15 in 1996, as stated in his LOA signed by him, or even Career HR #15, I believe he will address the matter.

Am I naive? Maybe. Am I too trusting of a person? Probably.

The LOA signed by Arod is to specific for him not to address, if found not true. Whether AROD Authenticated staff screwed up or not. Arod signed it and I believe if he is aware, with video proof, he will want to make it right. I have faith he would do the right thing.

I know many don't like Arod. That's fine. I will still put my trust and faith in him doing the right thing.

It's not like this bat was authenticated by PSA, then found not to be good. This bat was authenticated by AROD Authentic and signed by Arod himself.

Again, no matter how many people hate Arod, I have to believe if he is aware, he will make it right.

Regards, Tony


Tony...this is no about hating or even disliking Arod...in fact, I like him as a player and only wish he would play for my team. I would have the same opinion on just about any big-name player, with lots of interest in them, their autogrpah and memoribllia. chris

[dodgersfan]

Iam getting a message that states the maximum downloads has been met.
Anyone else having the same problem?




Rudy



http://rapidshare.com/files/176465008/VTS_01_1.VOB






Here's the link to the video I received from seattle. Boston at Seattle
31 May 1996.

Be patient, it takes a bit to download (it's free)

When arod brings the bat back, you can see bright white on the bat. Could be a Rawlings, but not enough is there. Sad part, you can see griffey's full bat...lvs.

Download link: http://rapidshare.com/files/176465008/VTS_01_1.VOB (http://rapidshare.com/files/176465008/VTS_01_1.VOB)

[joelsabi]

Tony,

I just want to tell you that you are doing a great service to the game used community by allowing us to follow your journey in getting your item authenticated. Many would be satisfied with the COA as proof and not gone further. I, like many here, admire your thoroughness and your pursuit of the truth.

Joel

[3arod13]

Rudy,

No Ring? What does that refer to?

Tony

Rudy,

Would like to ask a favor from you. The picture where you show the bat label and and no ring, with the arrows. Can you do the same for the other picture, having and arrow pointing to the "poweried" and "label?"

Would like to use these in my documentation as proof that the bat in Toronto was a "Louisville Slugger" and not a "Rawlings" as stated by Arod in his LOA?

If you could email me both pics, it would be greatly appreciated.

arod13tb@yahoo.com

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

Here is A-Rod posong with a Rawlings bat like yours sorta. This card is also from 1996.

http://www.checkoutmycards.com/CardImages/Cards/059/102/09b.jpg

Thanks for adding a picture of this card. This is the first time I have seen a Rawlings Bat in Arod's hands. Still doesn't mean he used it, but it's still a first picture with him and a Rawlings.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

Rudy,

Would like to ask a favor from you. The picture where you show the bat label and and no ring, with the arrows. Can you do the same for the other picture, having and arrow pointing to the "poweried" and "label?"

Would like to use these in my documentation as proof that the bat in Toronto was a "Louisville Slugger" and not a "Rawlings" as stated by Arod in his LOA?

If you could email me both pics, it would be greatly appreciated.

arod13tb@yahoo.com

Regards, Tony

These pics

[3arod13]

Pictures too small to tell.

Would be nice to find a clearer photo. Definately doesn't look like a LVS label.

Tony

[3arod13]

Would be nice to find a clearer photo. Definately doesn't look like a LVS label.

Tony

http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/3/8/5/2/5/1/webimg/83719088_o.jpg

[3arod13]

It's amazing I was able to obtain a copy of the game Seattle at Toronto on 25 June 1996 from Canada, but can't get a copy of the game Boston Red Sox at Seattle on 31 May 1996. Still pressing on until I do.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

I will be posting the final results of my research on my 1996 Alex Rodriguez Rawlings Game Used Bat next week.

I'm waiting for one last piece for my research to be completed.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

As you all are aware, I had what I was made to believe to be an authentic 1996 Alex Rodriguez Rawlings Game Used HR #15 1996 Bat. The bat accompanied 3 LOA'S (AROD Authenticated, SDCA (Signed by Troy Kinunen), and PSA.

After extensive research by myself, I have proven the bat was not used to hit not only HR #15 1996, and went as far to prove it wasn't used to hit career HR #15.

I provided the proof to Arod and his representatives, and they were more than willing to correct the error.

The inscription HR #15 1996 was removed and replaced with Game Used 1996. Document and visual proof was provided.

Following this, I contacted Troy at MEARS and asked to him correct the initial LOA I paid for then. He is willing to do so, but feels he needs to add the history of the signature, that it was authenticated as a HR #15 bat, then changed to a Game Used Bat.

I disagree. If there was additional information about the "game use" of the bat (found out later someone other player used it, etc.), then I agree. We are only talking about an inscription being change. Game Use is not a question.

I've dealt with a lot with this bat. I'm just a collector who trusted those who authenticate game used memorabilia.

At this time, the bat is a 1996 Alex Rodriguez Rawlings Game Used Bat, with documentation that states so. I don't see why MEARS can't provide a letter stating so, with proof and documentation provided.

If I were to send the bat to PSA, with all documentation, that's how it would be authenticated.

Yes, we know what it was previously authenticated as, but that has been corrected. I see need to indicate this in the new LOA, unless there was new informatoin about the bats use.

I really need your thoughts on this.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

I want to add that I know how many of you feel about Arod and his signing of memorabilia.

I can honestly say that he did everything to correct this matter, and then some.

However this was signed and authenticated as a HR #15, I have no idea. But Arod was willing to everything possible to make this right.

Regards, Tony

[worldchamps]

If there was anything written/autographed on an item, and then removed, yes i personally think it is fair to know....i am glad to know MEARS is sticking to this. If a bat was personalized and then removed i would want to know, and i dont think it hurts the value, but it should be disclosed.

It is a different subject but the more concerning thing is AROD is authenicating something over 10 years old, but looking at what he was told to write on a bat on a white index card. They were already wrong once, how do you really know it was ever used by him at all. I bet he would sign a retail bat game used if they told them to.

[Kid4hof03]

I agree with MEARS 100% on this one. I do not think it would ever be fair to another collector to purchase this bat and not know all of the history behind it.

[Rboitano]

I dont care about third party LOA's. If its a team LOA or a player LOA then I care. I think its still a really cool bat, I was wondering if you still had it.

[WadeInBmore]

Tony...

Did you get anything other then the new inscription? That would suck to shell out the cash for a Arod HR bat and simply have it changed to game used:confused: As far as the documentation goes, even though it is unnecessary I would say that it keeps a paper trail consistant for the bat. If people track it down to your original purchase and then know about your issues with it being hr#15, it only adds to this bats unique story; I would assume the value has already gone down given the non-HR documentation. Let Mears do what they do, as I don't see it effecting the value of the bat, but maintain its story for whatever collector has the bat next.

wade

[bigtruck260]

I dont care about third party LOA's. If its a team LOA or a player LOA then I care. I think its still a really cool bat, I was wondering if you still had it.

Agreed Tony. I think you did enough research (and some guys here) to merit the removal of the false inscription - and as long as A-Rod re-did the inscription...to me, it's as if it was never inscribed before.

I have yet to see a Rawlings A-Rod bat as nice as yours. It's a really nice piece of history, regardless of whether or not it was used to hit a HR. With nearly 600 HRs to his credit, it just may be a HR bat...have you totally eliminated that possibility? Did you ever find photo proof that he used it in a game?

D

[emann]

Echoing the same thoughts, I also agree with MEARS on this one. I think it needs to be mentioned, but probably won't affect the value.

I'd also consider asking A-Rod's company to reimburse the cost of MEARS LOA or put up the cash toward a LOA from Taube. This is their mess and they still should clean it up...

[suicide_squeeze]

If there was anything written/autographed on an item, and then removed, yes i personally think it is fair to know....i am glad to know MEARS is sticking to this. If a bat was personalized and then removed i would want to know, and i dont think it hurts the value, but it should be disclosed.

I disagree.....totally. If the inscription on the bat was wrong to begin with, and that is obviously proven by the research done (by Tony), what is wrong with removing the incorrect inscription, as it SHOULD BE removed, and just left as a "game Used 1996" inscription with a new letter? What significance is there to the LOA stating that the bat was previously incorrectly listed as H.R. #15 from 1996? I don't see the relevance. It was an erroneous notation on the bat that was removed....WHY does there need to be a record of that?

It is a different subject but the more concerning thing is AROD is authenicating something over 10 years old, but looking at what he was told to write on a bat on a white index card. They were already wrong once, how do you really know it was ever used by him at all. I bet he would sign a retail bat game used if they told them to.

A-Rod is supposed to be able to trust his "people" who look after his stuff. Obviously mistakes are made by human beings, so what would make us think that a mistake or three throughout the years could not occur with his handled items? I think it's reasonable, and predictable, that there is that possibility. You, on the other hand, appear to be insinuating that his people are possibly doing things wrong intentionally, and I think you are quickly approaching dangerous ground there. It is disturbing to everyone that A-Rod has made inscriptions on at LEAST one (and most likely a handful) of game used pieces....but what kind of a FOOL would he be to make that practice commonplace? We all have the ability today to "photomatch" stuff via videos, tapes, photos, etc. I think all in all his stuff is golden, and I'm not even that big of an A-Rod fan. That said, I do own some of his items, and I certainly hope they are all legit. But no need to throw stones without any proof.

Just my opinion....peace.

[suicide_squeeze]

I agree with MEARS 100% on this one. I do not think it would ever be fair to another collector to purchase this bat and not know all of the history behind it.

Interesting position to take. Again.

Please, for my benefit, explain your reasoning behind this? I want to know what makes you think there is any relevance to taking a mismarked bat, tying it to a specific event, and correcting it to a meaningful correct inscription by removing the portion that is incorrect. The bat, in it's corrected state, is a nice item, and not misrepresenting it's heritage as it was before. BEFORE....it was a fraudulent piece. Now? It's golden. The correction "corrected" the error. What reason would there be to necessitate this chain of improper inscription followed by improper inscription removal play in the "disclosure" of ownership regarding this bat?

I am being sincere.....please explain to me the importance behind noting this information.....

It seems to me that a new LOA stating what the bat represents in it's current state is the only thing that matters. The other "record" part of it has already been documented.......right HERE. And MEARS could keep a record of the original LOA issued with it if they deemed necessary, couldn't they?

[WadeInBmore]

steve...

I would say that it maintains the bats history...and as Truck pointed out that if someone does match it to another homerun then the argument of it being a homerun bat doesn't exhist as it was originally mislabeled.

If years down the road people discover that this bat was once labeled a HR bat then, and then changed to its current state, questions would be brought up about why. Its simply disclosure and the story of this back. I would think this adds to its provenance and in turn maintains a consistant unarguable story. The question here of should be if Tony wants it to be so. A COA or LOA is supposed to list known facts about an item. The value shouldn't be affected by this statement, but its story maintains consistency and eliminates the potential question.

I think it only adds to the bats lore.

wade

[murfsteve25]

my only questions is why would you need 2 or 3 different LOA's for the same bat? What good is it going to do you if already have a LOA from Arod. I'd say the Arod LOA is as good as your gunna get. I dont see the value increasing just because you have 3 different LOA's stating the same thing.

just my 2 cents :)

[3arod13]

Kid4hof03: I agree with MEARS 100% on this one. I do not think it would ever be fair to another collector to purchase this bat and not know all of the history behind it.

Response: If a bat was authenticated, and someone then removed the tape on the handle, or removed a players number on the knob (which happened not to be the player in question), and you then wanted to have the letter upgraded without mentioning this, I agree 100%. For an inscription proven to be wrong, then corrected, I disagree.

Rboitano: I dont care about third party LOA's. If its a team LOA or a player LOA then I care. I think it’s still a really cool bat, I was wondering if you still had it.

Yes I do. There are thousands of Arod Louisville Sluggers and other style bats out there. You don’t come across a Rawlings often. Arod only used them early in his career. Reason why I love this bat.

Bigtruck260: I have yet to see a Rawlings A-Rod bat as nice as yours. It's a really nice piece of history, regardless of whether or not it was used to hit a HR. With nearly 600 HRs to his credit, it just may be a HR bat...have you totally eliminated that possibility? Did you ever find photo proof that he used it in a game?

Response: I do have a picture of Arod signing game used bats with Mill Creek Sports back then. As you can see in the picture I’ve attached, this Rawlings bat shows really nice game use and is cracked. In my research, this is the only picture I could find with a game used Rawlings bat in Arod’s possession. Finding one of him using one in a game has been difficult. But it’s known that he did use them early in his career. Do I believe it’s possible this is a HR bat, and the HR number (#15) was the incorrect HR Number? Sure, it is possible.

emann: I'd also consider asking A-Rod's company to reimburse the cost of MEARS LOA or put up the cash toward a LOA from Taube. This is their mess and they still should clean it up...

Response: They were more than generous in correcting this matter. Went above and beyond, so I am very satisfied with the outcome.

Suicide Squeeze: Interesting position to take. Again. Please, for my benefit, explain your reasoning behind this? I want to know what makes you think there is any relevance to taking a mismarked bat, tying it to a specific event, and correcting it to a meaningful correct inscription by removing the portion that is incorrect. The bat, in it's corrected state, is a nice item, and not misrepresenting it's heritage as it was before. BEFORE....it was a fraudulent piece. Now? It's golden. The correction "corrected" the error. What reason would there be to necessitate this chain of improper inscription followed by improper inscription removal play in the "disclosure" of ownership regarding this bat?
I am being sincere.....please explain to me the importance behind noting this information.....
It seems to me that a new LOA stating what the bat represents in it's current state is the only thing that matters. The other "record" part of it has already been documented.......right HERE. And MEARS could keep a record of the original LOA issued with it if they deemed necessary, couldn't they?

Response: Well said, and my point exactly. As stated earlier, If a bat was authenticated, and someone then removed the tape on the handle, or removed a players number on the knob (which happened not to be the player in question), and you wanted to have the letter upgraded without mentioning this, I agree 100%. For an inscription proven to be wrong, then corrected, I disagree. In the future, the bat would be sold in its current state, a Game Used Bat, not a HR Bat.



Murfsteve25: my only question is why would you need 2 or 3 different LOA's for the same bat? What good is it going to do you if already have a LOA from Arod. I'd say the Arod LOA is as good as your gunna get. I dont see the value increasing just because you have 3 different LOA's stating the same thing.

Response: I already paid for the MEARS LOA. MEARS letters provide more information and are very detailed with factory history, etc. You’re correct. I could just keep the Rawlings Company Letter (proof Arod ordered 12 bats of this model in 1996) and Arod’s LOA, and that should be enough.

WadeInBmore: I would say that it maintains the bats history...and as Truck pointed out that if someone does match it to another homerun then the argument of it being a homerun bat doesn't exhist as it was originally mislabeled.
If years down the road people discover that this bat was once labeled a HR bat then, and then changed to its current state, questions would be brought up about why. Its simply disclosure and the story of this back. I would think this adds to its provenance and in turn maintains a consistant unarguable story. The question here of should be if Tony wants it to be so. A COA or LOA is supposed to list known facts about an item. The value shouldn't be affected by this statement, but its story maintains consistency and eliminates the potential question.
I think it only adds to the bats lore. Wade

Response: I don’t think it maintains the bats history. It maintains the inscription history. As I stated earlier, “If a bat was authenticated, and someone then removed the tape on the handle, or removed a players number on the knob (which happened not to be the player in question), and you wanted to have the letter upgraded without mentioning this, I agree 100%.
For an inscription proven to be wrong, then corrected, I disagree. In the future, the bat would be sold as a Game Used Bat as documented, not a HR Bat. Even it proven down the road that it is actually is a HR Bat, but the number HR as inscribed wrong back in 1996, then that’s great. That can later be document. There is that possibility that it is a HR bat, but inscribed with the incorrect HR number. Finding pictures of Arod using a Rawlings in a game has been impossible. I’m sure they’re out there, but back then in 1996, you just can’t find photo’s, as you can today.

Many great comments and differences of opinion. This is why I brought it to this forum; this is why I value so many of your opinions (especially since you are game used collectors).

Many of you know there have been discussions in this forum about removing inscriptions and having the items reinscribed. I don’t see an issue with it, as long as the inscription is correct and accurate. The inscription was wrong; corrected; and the bat in its current state, is a 1996 Alex Rodriguez Rawlings Game Used Bat.

Overall: I agree with Suicide Squeeze.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

I forwarded this post to Troy for him to review all comments.

You all have provided me with some things to think about. Although I still feel, as stated earlier, if a bat was authenticated, and someone then removed the tape on the handle, or removed a players number on the knob (which happened not to be the player in questions number), and you wanted to have the letter upgraded without mentioning this, I agree 100%. For an inscription proven to be wrong, then corrected, I disagree.

After reading many of our comments and opinions, I will say that maybe keeping the HR #15 remarks in the MEARS LOA may help explain why there is a picture of Arod adding an inscription on this bat as a Yankee in 2009.

The signature from 1996 was left on the bat, and only inscription “HR #15 1996” was removed and replaced with “Game Used 1996” in 2009. This would at least explain this.

I’m considering asking Troy to keep the info about the HR #15 1996 inscription in the MEARS LOA, and at least state something like this in his "History" section of the MEARS LOA:

“Although this Rawlings bat was initially inscribed HR #15 1996, and authenticated as such, and then proven later not to have been the actual bat in which Alex Rodriguez used to hit HR #15 1996, it is still possible that this is a bat used by Alex Rodriguez to hit a HR, just not HR #15 1996.”

Your thoughts?

Regards, Tony

[metsbats]

steve...

I would say that it maintains the bats history...and as Truck pointed out that if someone does match it to another homerun then the argument of it being a homerun bat doesn't exhist as it was originally mislabeled.

If years down the road people discover that this bat was once labeled a HR bat then, and then changed to its current state, questions would be brought up about why. Its simply disclosure and the story of this back. I would think this adds to its provenance and in turn maintains a consistant unarguable story. The question here of should be if Tony wants it to be so. A COA or LOA is supposed to list known facts about an item. The value shouldn't be affected by this statement, but its story maintains consistency and eliminates the potential question.

I think it only adds to the bats lore.

wade


If you do a google on "Alex Rodriguez game used rawlings bat" it'll come back links to GUU with all the discussions of this very bat and the history of it. Should Tony ever part with this bat the seller may discover the history anyway if they did this.

I think MEARS disclosing the history on the LOA will protect Tony from any liability and future issues with the next owner of this bat.

[3arod13]

If you do a google on "Alex Rodriguez game used rawlings bat" it'll come back links to GUU with all the discussions of this very bat and the history of it. Should Tony ever part with this bat the seller may discover the history anyway if they did this.

I think MEARS disclosing the history on the LOA will protect Tony from any liability and future issues with the next owner of this bat.

After reviewing all of your comments and opinions, I'm rethinking this matter.

As previously stated, "I’m considering asking Troy to keep the info about the HR #15 1996 inscription in the MEARS LOA, and at least state something like this in his "History" section of the MEARS LOA:

“Although this Rawlings bat was initially inscribed HR #15 1996, and authenticated as such, and then proven later not to have been the actual bat in which Alex Rodriguez used to hit HR #15 1996, it is still possible that this is a bat used by Alex Rodriguez to hit a HR, just not HR #15."

This way, if it is later proven to have been used to hit a HR, it will show the initital HR #15 inscription was incorrect, but it is a HR bat.

Regards, Tony

[murfsteve25]

Kid4hof03: Murfsteve25: my only question is why would you need 2 or 3 different LOA's for the same bat? What good is it going to do you if already have a LOA from Arod. I'd say the Arod LOA is as good as your gunna get. I dont see the value increasing just because you have 3 different LOA's stating the same thing.

Response: I already paid for the MEARS LOA. MEARS letters provide more information and are very detailed with factory history, etc. You’re correct. I could just keep the Rawlings Company Letter (proof Arod ordered 12 bats of this model in 1996) and Arod’s LOA, and that should be enough.





Good point. I see your angle now.

[GameBats]

Tony,

I believe your intentions are all good, but the statement "it is still possible that this is a bat used by Alex Rodriguez to hit a HR, just not HR #15." is pure speculation.

Why not speculate "it is still possible that this is a bat used by Alex Rodriguez during batting practice, not during an actual game."

Doesn't sound as enticing, but if we're specuating you never know.

Just let Mears write whatever they want and let the bat be judged on its own merits.

- John G.

[Kid4hof03]

My thinking in all of this and the reason I agree with MEARS initial response is for the future. If I were to buy a piece like this and then find out all the threads, all the back information about the bat I would be pretty concerned. My first thought would be, "why did the seller not tell me all this?" It would cause me to questions everything else about the bat.

I personally think that full disclosure is the only way to go on an item like this. Not giving all the details up front gives an appearance of dishonest, even though I am sure none is intended in this case.

[3arod13]

Tony,

I believe your intentions are all good, but the statement "it is still possible that this is a bat used by Alex Rodriguez to hit a HR, just not HR #15." is pure speculation.

Why not speculate "it is still possible that this is a bat used by Alex Rodriguez during batting practice, not during an actual game."

Doesn't sound as enticing, but if we're specuating you never know.

Just let Mears write whatever they want and let the bat be judged on its own merits.

- John G.




John,

Thanks for your comment.

I would agree with you if this was a bat that showed game use and was only signed by Arod, with no other inscription, and I wanted that comment added in the MEARS LOA History. That would be pure speculation.

It is well know that player’s do make mistakes and error on inscriptions. Nobody’s perfect. Arod did the right thing in correcting this error. The bat is game used. The bat was inscribed HR #15 1996. It is very well possible that the HR (#15) inscription was wrong, and it could possible be a HR bat from another game.

I don’t see anything wrong with my statement, considering it was signed as a HR bat.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

Matter finally resolved.

Regards, Tony

[kellsox]

Very detailed letter which captures the full background of the bat. I find the grade of A10 interesting. It states the bat is 100% documented- with Arod's initial inscription error(which puts into question Arod's recollection of when the bat was used) and no photo documentation of him using a Rawlings during a game, how can the authenticator be 100% that the bat was used in an actual game. Based on their grading criteria, wouldn't an A9 be more appropriate?
K

[3arod13]

Very detailed letter which captures the full background of the bat. I find the grade of A10 interesting. It states the bat is 100% documented- with Arod's initial inscription error(which puts into question Arod's recollection of when the bat was used) and no photo documentation of him using a Rawlings during a game, how can the authenticator be 100% that the bat was used in an actual game. Based on their grading criteria, wouldn't an A9 be more appropriate?
K

I think photo matching is great. But you have to be realistic when trying to compare finding a photo matched from today, than from earlier years.

The farther you go back, the more difficult it is to find vidoes and pictures. Technology today is much more advance, and we have many more tools.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

Very detailed letter which captures the full background of the bat. I find the grade of A10 interesting. It states the bat is 100% documented- with Arod's initial inscription error(which puts into question Arod's recollection of when the bat was used) and no photo documentation of him using a Rawlings during a game, how can the authenticator be 100% that the bat was used in an actual game. Based on their grading criteria, wouldn't an A9 be more appropriate?
K

It is well known Arod used Rawlings bats during games early in his career, so that's not really in question. Finding a picture is the difficult part.

Regards, Tony

[kellsox]

I think photo matching is great. But you have to be realistic when trying to compare finding a photo matched from today, than from earlier years.

The farther you go back, the more difficult it is to find vidoes and pictures. Technology today is much more advance, and we have many more tools.

Regards, Tony
Agreed, a photo match would be great but my question was that w/o a photo of Arod using this model bat in any game action how can it be authenticated as 100% game used. His initial statement was that it was used to hit a specific home run which was proven wrong, then over 10 years later he signs it as game used. If there is doubt by the player, how can the authenticator be sure it wasn't just a bp bat, etc... Like I said nice bat- just questioning the authentication/grading system
k