kingjammy24
02-15-2007, 08:29 PM
i recently made a post questioning MEARS' ability to authenticate NBA shoes. see thread for details: http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=7030
troy was good enough to respond. see his response in the basketball sections of mearsonline.com.
troy, while MEARS' efforts in this specific area seem to go further than i may have given credit for, at the end of it all i don't believe that genuine authenticating can be done solely via a collection of photos, spreadsheets, and data. if it could, then MEARS could package all of it's research into kits and anyone who purchased a "baseball kit", for example, could suddenly be transformed into a "professional authenticator". the numbers and stats don't tell the whole story. they aren't a replacement for experience. they don't capture many of the subleties. in the same way that reading a cookbook doesn't make a chef, looking at photos and auction data doesn't make an expert. at best, it makes a puppet that reads data and then tries to apply it. if i don't have a deep understanding of what i'm looking at, then i don't know what subleties i'm missing, i can't even be sure i'm properly applying the data, and i don't really what deviations would be realistic or unrealistic. it's the difference between someone who simply follows a recipe and a genuine chef. one is just strictly following a set of instructions, completely unaware of what's happening and why, while the other understands the entire process. the results are often very different.
"we have built a data center of 1026 game worn shoes covering baseball, football, and basketball. The database has tracked items, which have sold in the organized hobby. The dating ranges of shoes start in 1905 and span to 2006. We also track manufacture and have studied examples of Mizuno, Spalding, Nike, Puma. Wilson, Fila, Rawlings, MacGregor, Champion, Converse, Riddell, Dunk, Patrick Ewing, and many other brands."
you've tracked industry sales, manufacturers, labeling/styles (i assume). that's a great start. it's hardly enough though is it? armed with spreadsheets of bat sales and manufacturer changes still wouldn't make me a bat expert. there are a whole slew of issues i'd be unaware of. will the database tell me the difference between contrived use and genuine use? will it tell me the difference between professional grade wood and retail wood? there are dozens of issues that aren't revealed in the "stats".
"We can tell you what brand Wade Boggs wore during the 1996 World Series. Now, Getty Image will also verify this for you, but MEARS can tell you what size he wore."
you're correct in saying that photo resources will enable anyone to easily discern brands. size tracking is great though. not quite sure how you manage to track sizes "for each player", but kudos if you do.
"Did you know Muhammad Ali was a size 13? Brett Favre consistently wore size 13.5. Roger Clemens wore size 11.5 and personally verified it for us. Pistol Pete Maravich wore shoes manufactured by three different companies, yet his shoe size remained the exact same. Shoes direct from the estate of Joe DiMaggio varied 2 full sizes from examples of his playing days shoes to his golf shoes worn during his retirement."
not that it matters, but size is relative to manufacturer and model. so yes i would believe that although his feet may not have grown at all, joe d may have taken a variety of different sizes. that's common knowledge though isn't it. i take a size 13 nike air max 180 and a size 11 air jordan. go figure. my point is, congrats on the sizing info but it's still not enough. would knowing that mantle swung 34" K55 bats be enough to determine the authenticity of a mantle gamer? again, it's a nice starting point but i think it's dangerous to think a pile of data is all that's needed.
kudos on your collection of retail catalogs to help differentiate between pro and retail models. as well, more congrats on working directly with shoe manufacturers.
"The tracking and studying of this data is the basis of our qualifications in regards to MEARS evaluating game worn NBA shoes."
here is the entire gist of my issue. tracking and studying data doesn't qualify one as an expert. it may qualify one as a statistician, but not as a subject matter expert. reading recipes doesn't make a chef, reading medical statistics doesn't make me a doctor. i have to think that john taube, mike specht and dave bushing are more than a bunch of guys who have read the LVS records. there's an intangible, personal knowledge about bats that they all have from their direct experience.
in authenticating bats, for example, there's a great deal of emphasis placed on ascertaining whether the bat was actually used by the player whose name is on the barrell. even though we've all got the technical stats for the model, finish, length, and weight, we recognize these stats aren't enough to really render a conclusive opinion. you've got to take into account player charateristics, location of ballmarks, knob markings, etc. it would seem nba shoes would likely have the same subtle issues that wouldn't readily appear in photos or size data.
you can't begin to think you can render expert opinions based solely on the fact that you have lots of photos, auction data, and a sizing database. the value of opinions from people like denny esken, john taube or howard wolf goes far beyond them having photo libraries, auction data, and records. there is a wealth of knowledge created from years of first-hand experience that cannot be conveyed through spreadsheets and photos. if there wasn't, then i assume that as soon as i buy my Vince Malta book, my opinions will be just as valid as Bushing and Taube's?
incidentally, there are some fantastic fake nikes being pumped out on the market. i'll assume your data covers how to discern them.
in a time when people are producing fake "0062" tags, when they know enough to use a serged stitch, and where many clubhouse sources can order pro-spec jerseys, knowing the proper model, code and size just isn't enough. in the same way that "painting by numbers" isn't really painting, authenticating based solely on a few technical specs and photos isn't really authenticating. as efficient as it may seem, you can't "template" the whole process. it's a fast food approach. at mcdonalds, noone is a chef or even a real line cook. they simply know to press a button, wait 2 min, then lift a cover. such a process can't turn out a quality product.
in the same way, dave bushing may know how to read a spreadsheet, look at some photos, check for a size, but that hardly means he's qualified to examine nba shoes. look at the jams he got into when he decided he was qualified to authenticate gloves. all the databases in the world couldn't help him.
rudy.
troy was good enough to respond. see his response in the basketball sections of mearsonline.com.
troy, while MEARS' efforts in this specific area seem to go further than i may have given credit for, at the end of it all i don't believe that genuine authenticating can be done solely via a collection of photos, spreadsheets, and data. if it could, then MEARS could package all of it's research into kits and anyone who purchased a "baseball kit", for example, could suddenly be transformed into a "professional authenticator". the numbers and stats don't tell the whole story. they aren't a replacement for experience. they don't capture many of the subleties. in the same way that reading a cookbook doesn't make a chef, looking at photos and auction data doesn't make an expert. at best, it makes a puppet that reads data and then tries to apply it. if i don't have a deep understanding of what i'm looking at, then i don't know what subleties i'm missing, i can't even be sure i'm properly applying the data, and i don't really what deviations would be realistic or unrealistic. it's the difference between someone who simply follows a recipe and a genuine chef. one is just strictly following a set of instructions, completely unaware of what's happening and why, while the other understands the entire process. the results are often very different.
"we have built a data center of 1026 game worn shoes covering baseball, football, and basketball. The database has tracked items, which have sold in the organized hobby. The dating ranges of shoes start in 1905 and span to 2006. We also track manufacture and have studied examples of Mizuno, Spalding, Nike, Puma. Wilson, Fila, Rawlings, MacGregor, Champion, Converse, Riddell, Dunk, Patrick Ewing, and many other brands."
you've tracked industry sales, manufacturers, labeling/styles (i assume). that's a great start. it's hardly enough though is it? armed with spreadsheets of bat sales and manufacturer changes still wouldn't make me a bat expert. there are a whole slew of issues i'd be unaware of. will the database tell me the difference between contrived use and genuine use? will it tell me the difference between professional grade wood and retail wood? there are dozens of issues that aren't revealed in the "stats".
"We can tell you what brand Wade Boggs wore during the 1996 World Series. Now, Getty Image will also verify this for you, but MEARS can tell you what size he wore."
you're correct in saying that photo resources will enable anyone to easily discern brands. size tracking is great though. not quite sure how you manage to track sizes "for each player", but kudos if you do.
"Did you know Muhammad Ali was a size 13? Brett Favre consistently wore size 13.5. Roger Clemens wore size 11.5 and personally verified it for us. Pistol Pete Maravich wore shoes manufactured by three different companies, yet his shoe size remained the exact same. Shoes direct from the estate of Joe DiMaggio varied 2 full sizes from examples of his playing days shoes to his golf shoes worn during his retirement."
not that it matters, but size is relative to manufacturer and model. so yes i would believe that although his feet may not have grown at all, joe d may have taken a variety of different sizes. that's common knowledge though isn't it. i take a size 13 nike air max 180 and a size 11 air jordan. go figure. my point is, congrats on the sizing info but it's still not enough. would knowing that mantle swung 34" K55 bats be enough to determine the authenticity of a mantle gamer? again, it's a nice starting point but i think it's dangerous to think a pile of data is all that's needed.
kudos on your collection of retail catalogs to help differentiate between pro and retail models. as well, more congrats on working directly with shoe manufacturers.
"The tracking and studying of this data is the basis of our qualifications in regards to MEARS evaluating game worn NBA shoes."
here is the entire gist of my issue. tracking and studying data doesn't qualify one as an expert. it may qualify one as a statistician, but not as a subject matter expert. reading recipes doesn't make a chef, reading medical statistics doesn't make me a doctor. i have to think that john taube, mike specht and dave bushing are more than a bunch of guys who have read the LVS records. there's an intangible, personal knowledge about bats that they all have from their direct experience.
in authenticating bats, for example, there's a great deal of emphasis placed on ascertaining whether the bat was actually used by the player whose name is on the barrell. even though we've all got the technical stats for the model, finish, length, and weight, we recognize these stats aren't enough to really render a conclusive opinion. you've got to take into account player charateristics, location of ballmarks, knob markings, etc. it would seem nba shoes would likely have the same subtle issues that wouldn't readily appear in photos or size data.
you can't begin to think you can render expert opinions based solely on the fact that you have lots of photos, auction data, and a sizing database. the value of opinions from people like denny esken, john taube or howard wolf goes far beyond them having photo libraries, auction data, and records. there is a wealth of knowledge created from years of first-hand experience that cannot be conveyed through spreadsheets and photos. if there wasn't, then i assume that as soon as i buy my Vince Malta book, my opinions will be just as valid as Bushing and Taube's?
incidentally, there are some fantastic fake nikes being pumped out on the market. i'll assume your data covers how to discern them.
in a time when people are producing fake "0062" tags, when they know enough to use a serged stitch, and where many clubhouse sources can order pro-spec jerseys, knowing the proper model, code and size just isn't enough. in the same way that "painting by numbers" isn't really painting, authenticating based solely on a few technical specs and photos isn't really authenticating. as efficient as it may seem, you can't "template" the whole process. it's a fast food approach. at mcdonalds, noone is a chef or even a real line cook. they simply know to press a button, wait 2 min, then lift a cover. such a process can't turn out a quality product.
in the same way, dave bushing may know how to read a spreadsheet, look at some photos, check for a size, but that hardly means he's qualified to examine nba shoes. look at the jams he got into when he decided he was qualified to authenticate gloves. all the databases in the world couldn't help him.
rudy.