MLB Authentication getting specific I LIKE!!

[suave1477]

I noticed lately the Authentication process for MLB is getting more detailed.

I know they have been doing this for a while with baseballs such as Ball pitched by (so & so) during xxx inning.

But they didn't do it much for bats until lately.

I have aquired a couple of bats and one was cracked.

It actually listed the game, the player who used the bat, the inning it was cracked, & the pitcher that was on the mound when the bat cracked.

I think this is fantastic especially for those who either try to photomatch there bats, It gives you a more detailed idea of when exactly the bat was used during which innings. Also this is great to find out what hits this was used for.

My cracked bat which I still have a bit of more narrowing down on - but so far I believe it was used to hit 2 doubles & 2 triples from back to back games!!

[Manram]

I agree. I have one bat that has all of that detail, it makes it much easier to just go to the inning and see the player crack it then having to watch every at bat of their's

[CampWest]

Now if only we could get the official pitch by pitch log to identify broken bats in the box score and/or game log...

This additional detail has been practically helpful for me as well. Somebody tried to sell me a bat as a HR bat, the MLB Authentication proved the bat was used in a game in which a HR was hit; however the HR was hit in the 8th inning and the bat was, per MLB, broken in the 5th inning. So clearly not the bat that hit that 8th inning HR.

The more detail the better! I definitely appreciate their efforts to provide more detail.

[sox83cubs84]

I don't bid on bats from MLB.com personally, but anytime specific information is addressed, it makes authentication and customer comfort greater. Nice idea, MLB.

Dave M.
Chicago area

[PwKw13]

I think it depends on the individual authenticator. I recently questioned a bat that was listed in the database as a "Todd Helton Game Used Baseball Bat" because I checked MLB.TV and it didn't look like Helton used the bat in the game that was referenced. MLB Authentication responded, "We have talked with the authenticator and they have confirmed that the only info they have was that the bat was a Todd Helton model bat. They had no list of who used it."

That was a little disturbing!

[joelsabi]

I think it depends on the individual authenticator. I recently questioned a bat that was listed in the database as a "Todd Helton Game Used Baseball Bat" because I checked MLB.TV and it didn't look like Helton used the bat in the game that was referenced. MLB Authentication responded, "We have talked with the authenticator and they have confirmed that the only info they have was that the bat was a Todd Helton model bat. They had no list of who used it."

That was a little disturbing!

I was thinking the same. I'm wondering if the "good news" is just certain authenticators being meticulous instead of new training used by all authenticators. I just don't see any consistency, so far, to say this is a policy of MLB Authentication, where descriptions are more detailed for all items. If it was a noticeable change across the board, then it would be great news.