Babe Ruth Bats

[nesportspromotions]

OK, OK... I'm thinking of laying some serious dough out on these bats.

Are they REAL?

There are what look to be OLD seem & ball marks on the back and sides of the barrel.

I'm really nervous. HELP!

The provenace with these bats are that the come from the Babe's daughter as she removed them from the Hall of Fame in 1982.

There is another bat that I don't want and haven't photographed that is inscribed and signed by Dorothy Ruth Pirone, "In memory of my Dad - 1982"

Thanks Again!

This bat is 35 3/4 inches and 34.5 oz










This bat is 35 3/4 inches and 38.5 oz

[suave1477]

Ok im not a Ruth expert but im gonna take a shot in the dark on this one and maybe im about to look like a fool. but it seems a little too obvious on these.


ARE YOU KIDDING ME????????????

They show absolutely no use, and they look brand new like they were made yesterday and the wood shows no aging whatsoever.

Just my thought!!!

[bat_master]

Ok im not a Ruth expert but im gonna take a shot in the dark on this one and maybe im about to look like a fool. but it seems a little too obvious on these.


ARE YOU KIDDING ME????????????

They show absolutely no use, and they look brand new like they were made yesterday and the wood shows no aging whatsoever.

Just my thought!!!

Suave:
How can you make an assertion like that without seeing the hitting surface of each bat or without examining each bat in person? I would think that great hitters like Ruth, Williams, Mantle, etc would have large concentrations of stitch marks on the hitting surface, not over the labeling. Being a Ruth expert has nothing to do with this. This is simply a case of having seen some bats over the years.

For those readers that have had the pleasure of looking through the Smithsonian Baseball book by Stephen Wong there is a photo on page 69 that shows eight Ruth gamers side by side. While most of these bats do appear to show much more use (with assorted marks, dings, and scratches all over the barrel) that these shown here, I really don't think a true opinion can be formed without examining them in person.

As far as a bat aging I would expect that the storage conditions and any pre-storage precautions that were taken would have a lot to do with a bat's present visual condition. If these bats have been stored at the HOF since 1950 or before it would be conceivable that they would have aged quite well.

In my opinion, to disparage a bat without having specialized knowledge of either the player's bats or bats in general does a great disservice both to the buyer and the seller.

Tim Byington
t_byington@yahoo.com

[nesportspromotions]

There seems to be very light us on th BACK and SIDES of the barrel. (NOT viewable in the pics I took.)

[suave1477]

LIKE I SAID MY COMMENT WAS AN OPINION FROM THE PHOTOS SHOWN THATS ALL.

As far as bat aging well over time i agree with that but not matter what a bat still ages and by the looks of it the bat looks brand new and the finish on it looks like it crystal clean.

Again this is my opinion and im going by what I see in the photos.

[worldchamps]

I did a quick Google image search and here is the bat that Sotheby's (sp?) sold. To me this is what a bat of this age should/would look like. Those pictures look like a brand new one, in my opinion.

[suave1477]

I disagree in the Sotheby photos you can see the wood has aged and darkened over time.

The other photos of the Babe Ruth bat looks like the bat is clean and shiny as if it came right out of the factory

[flaco1801]

louisville slugger made replica bats in the 80s of ruth i know fer sure and others. they are exact duplicates of the originals. clemente was another replica made. this bat could be one of them be careful looks new

[trsent]

I am not a vintage bat expert and I have very little experience dealing with such items (and to think I have a bat on consignment with a major auction house right now that is pre-1970s that should fetch over $10,000.00) but I do know one thing:

A guy is thinking about buying some bats for a large amount of money. Any responses about his inquiry should come from people who have bought and sold and researched such an item in the past - Not people sitting around who like to get involved with any and every discussion on this forum. It may hurt the final sale or lack of a final sale because someone is making a view of an item that they have no experience with in the past.

I am going to assume (and you know what they say when you make an assumption) this is not my opinion only.

[b.heagy]

I have handled vintage game used bats. Not as many as others on this forum but I have a pretty good feel for items. I would not be comfortable buying these for serious money. Now albeit I am looking at a picture. From the photos this bat has a modern look to it. The wood looks too good, the stampings look fresh. Those bats with those particular markings would date from the 1921-1930 labeling period if I am not mistaken. Wait for Jim Caravello or Mike Specht to read this thread. Then you will have a better opinion of authenticity. I believe Ruth liked longer and and heavy bats. Like I said the right two men will read this thread and will be able to give you a much better judgement.