Hines Ward Game Cut/Game Worn in Vintage Authentics

[kingjammy24]

Eric:
You say it's important for people to know what an A5 means so that they understand what they may or may not be getting. What they're getting is evident in the item itself. MEARS issues these grades and you feel it behooves collectors to understand them. Let me go a step further and take an opposite approach and say it behooves them more to do the opposite; to ignore the grade. To refrain from giving it any real weight or consideration. That way, collectors will a) acquire the skills to evaluate items on their own b) cease depending on MEARS which has shown itself to unreliable c) not be required to spend an inordinate amount of time and effort reading MEARS self-serving legalese. Ignoring the grades means there's little value to discussing them.
The A5 has long failed to provide collectors with any real insight. It's an entirely proprietary term, clearly confusing, seemingly drafted by a lawyer in an attempt to absolve a company of any sort of genuine authentication, doled out by an individual with a severe lack of expertise in anything except bats who has been selected to authenticate everything from vintage football jerseys to modern batting helmets because the company lacks the resources to hire people with the necessary skills. Why then should collectors to pay any attention to it? I'd like to understand why you take the grade seriously.
A sharp collector noticed the issue with the Ward jersey and a couple of likely conclusions were reached. Great work! The necessary work was done and, as usual, not by the paid authenticator. Isn't this the way it always plays out though? MEARS makes an error, someone else spots it, Troy or Dave do the "read the fine print" dance, and we all debate their semantics for a week. The grades can't do any harm if noone takes them seriously and I stopped taking MEARS seriously a long time ago.

Joel: You're right, these LOAs are necessary for sales by the auction houses and dealers. Perhaps if they notice collectors are ignoring them, they'll stop paying for them? After all, it's only an added expense. I'll go on record saying that whether items have been "authenticated" or not has absolutely no bearing on my decision to purchase them. If others echo this sentiment, then hopefully over time we'll see a change.
Regarding MEARS "nice system", take a look at the current Mastro auction. Here's a very small sample of items authenticated by Bushing in that auction:

1933-34 Link Lyman Chicago Bears Game Worn Road Uniform
1969 Lloyd Mumford Miami Dolphins Game Worn Home Jersey
1993 Art Monk Washington Redskins Game Worn Home Jersey
1936 Charles "Red" Ruffing New York Yankees Game Worn Road Jersey
1940-41 Dick Errickson Boston Bees/Braves Game Worn Home Uniform
1968 Leo Durocher Chicago Cubs Game Worn Road Jersey
1984 Jim Palmer Baltimore Orioles Game Worn Road Jersey
2002 Sammy Sosa Chicago Cubs Game Worn Home Jersey
1974-75 Pat Riley Los Angeles Lakers Game Worn Jersey
1993-94 Charles Barkley Phoenix Suns Game Worn Road Jersey
1993 Jim Thome AAA Charlotte Knights Game Used Batting Helmet
Hall of Famers & Star Players Game Used Batting Gloves (24)

Holy. hot. crap. It looks like a joke doesn't? One man apparently has the expertise to authenticate everything from a 1933 Bears uniform to a 1974 Lakers jersey to a 1940 Bees Jersey to a 2003 Cavs jersey. Even a pair of 1940 pants, modern batting gloves and a minor league batting helmet! And that's of course in addition to his expertise on bats and fielding gloves. Now either he's the most brilliant guy to ever walk the planet (afterall, he did get a Masters degree) or .. well I'll leave you to come up with your own conclusion. Asserting that 1 man can authenticate 70 yrs worth of jerseys, helmets, and gloves across 3 sports is not "a nice system". At best it's a complete joke. It's almost like he went to the Lou Lampson "authenticate anything anyone gives you" School of Authenticating. A "nice system" is the last thing I'd call it. A profit making machine, sure.

Rudy.

[Eric]

Rudy-
You have a great point- if one does all of his/her own homework then the coas/loas and grades are meaningless. My point is, personally I pay attention to the work put into their determination of an a1 a5 a7 or a10. Perhaps there is provenance. Perhaps there is evidence of restoration which i cannot see from internet photos. My definition of doing your homework is to gather all information (the info is weighted differently in my mind based on who it's coming from). A letter which says the vague "it has all identifiers and proper tagging" is worthless, but perhaps there is something within the worksheet which will help me complete my investigation.
Eric

[trsent]

Rudy, do you think Dave Bushing authenticates all these items himself? Did you ever ask how many people work on their staff and what type of database they have to authenticate items?

Why don't you go to the MEARS forum (where you will receive personal responses) and ask your questions. I bet Troy and Dave Grob will gladly spend the time working with your issues.

In the meantime, I am glad to have you back on Game Used Universe, you were missed. In the present-time, I sort of wish you would not get all over Dave Bushing's case because as he is involved, but there is an extensive staff working for MEARS trying their best to authenticate genuine items.

Is your list from Mastro stating that they all can't be genuine items because you think it is too much for them to authenticate even though you have never asked them personally about their staff and entire process?

The web site is http://www.mearsonline.com/

[kingjammy24]

eric: agreed. i would take whatever information you feel is handy from the authentication but getting into a lather over the grade seems to be a waste. a2 a5 a10 it all means the same - nothing.

joel: the only 2 names on the loas are bushing and troy. while i can't account for every single worksheet MEARS has ever done, i'll say that the only signature i've ever seen on them is bushings'. hence my conclusion. if my signature is on the loa and the worksheet then i must've been the one to authenticate it. a database, as you know, is only as good as the data inputed. i have serious reservations about the quality of the MEARS database after seeing the items that have slipped past it. once, for example, i emailed troy to correct a "1993" mcgwire they had authenticated. i said it was a 1996. troy emailed me and explained the error by saying they didn't have necessary images in their database. (of course these images were all over getty). so they don't have a 1996 oakland jersey in their database but a 1933 chicago bears is apparently no problem? wow.
regarding me working with mears: i've absolutely nothing to gain from that. i help them for free and they in turn charge others for the very information i've given them? i think my time is better spent here discussing jerseys rather than listening to dave grob show me why he would've made a great used car salesman. however, i agree with not being all over bushing. i genuinely hope this the last i speak of mears. i don't find them relevant in the least. lets talk jerseys!
fyi: my list from mastro isn't meant to question the authenticity of any of their items. rather, it's simply meant to show the shocking variety of items bushing authenticates. grob has admitted they don't have specialized experts in all of these fields. hence you get a bat expert looking at jerseys. hence you get a 1996 mcgwire jersey being authenticated as a 1993. at any rate, no more mears. let's move on!

rudy.

[JimCaravello]

Just my two cents on this thread which I have been following closely.............

First off - Rudy - EXTREMELY happy to have you back and I agree 100% with your comments...............

Secondly - this thread validates why GUU is so great for the collector. It will help prevent people from making $100 and $1000 mistakes........

Relative to authenticators, last year I purchased a few items in auction and two of them I still laugh at what occured relative to the COAs. The first item was my 1986 Dave Righetti Game Worn Road jersey authenticated by MEARS with an A-10 Grade. The jersey was missing an armband and had team altered stitching on the buttons. Neither of these items was mentioned by MEARS. When I pointed this out to Dave Grob, they acknowledeged they made a mistake and regraded the jersey an A9 ( they never sent another COA ) and they sent me 10% of the purchase price back. How does MEARS - the supposed leader in the hobby not see an armband missing on a 1986 Yankees jersey? What about the team altered stitching on the buttons? This was mind boggling to me. I can't agree with Rudy's comments more - they missgrade a 1986 Yankees jersey but yet they can grade all sports from all eras?

The second item I won in auction last year that I continue to laugh at is my Ernie Banks 1950's Game Used Bat that comes with a COA from PSA ( auto guys and not the bat guys ) authenticating the autograph on my bat. Folks - the bat is not autographed and the COA is clearly printed for my bat. What a travesty!

Before these events, I never relied on COAs which is my Third Point - Do your own homework! Make yourself an expert! I have learned so much by participating in this Forum and GUU and I NEVER RELY ON OTHER COAS - this goes for both jerseys and bats that I purchase. If you have concerns, pass on these A5 jerseys - in my opinion half of them are not legitimate. I had a conversation recently with a good friend and we were discussing game used football jerseys and we discussed how 90% of them looked like they came off the rack with tags and had no use! Yet - these jersey are graded and authenticated as game used.

In my opinion, one of the problems with MEARS is that they are assigning grades for items which should not be graded at all. For instance - a team index bat should not be graded A7, or A8 or whatever grade they want to give it because it will confuse the novice collector when you compare that grade to a legitimate factory documented player bat that has the same grade. People have spent thousands on team index bats that were used by John Doe instead of Clemente, Mathews, etc. I am firm in my conviction on this. I think they are misleading the collector. The problem with MEARS is that they are too liberal in their grading. Sorry Troy and Dave - but you are. Do you have to grade everything that comes across your desk and assign it a grade? Are we not trying to authenticate an item as being a game used item? If its borderline, can we just pass on it and not call it A5 or A4?

Here is a great example for all to examine. The following link is from Vintage Authentics current auction for a Yaz bat:

http://vintageauthentics.at.truition...aunbr=72019964

This bat has been graded A6 by MEARS. Here is the description by Vintage:

Description:

Blonde Louisville Slugger C271 signature model bat used by Hall of Fame Triple Crown winner Carl Yastrzemski during his 1983 final MLB season. The bat measures 31.2 oz and 34 3/8" exhibiting light game use with light ball marks and surface stitch marks with an uncracked handle. The bat's knob has been markered with Yaz's #8 in black. The bat earns a final grade of 6.

In reading this, you assume that the bat was used by Yaz in 1983 and has light use and was graded A6 because it matches factory records and has light use. The bat has a standard finish per the MEARS Letter of Opinion. The MEARS Letter of Opinion goes on to say:

Matches Factory Records: Yes - Baseball Promotions
Bat Used During: Regular Season
Finish: Standard ( wording below says natural )

In the comments section of the MEARS COA they indicate that "Louisville Slugger factory records show that all of the small grain 34 1/2" C271 model bats in natural finish were shpped to Baseball Promotions in 1983-1984, not sent to Yaz or the Red Sox". They also say that the bat is a professional signature model, use and manufacturer characteristics cannot be attributed to Yaz.

Let's look at some facts:

• Yaz's last year was 1983
• This bat is probably from 84 or 85 ( 83 and 84 was a crossover labeling period ) - could be from 1983, but I highly doubt it
• The bat clearly does not match anything that Yaz or the Red Sox ordered and even MEARS acknowledges this
• Yaz ordered only WIDE GRAIN C271 bats in 1983 with Natural Finish ( he also ordered C271 Hickory Models )
• The MEARS COA clearly says this bat was used during the regular season
• The COA is in conflict with itself

Now - the question is, how can you give this bat an A6 grade and also grade a legitimate Yaz bat from any year with light use an A6? Someone will be buying nothing more than a promotional signed bat and both Vintage Authentics ( with their description in the auction ) and MEARS ( with their A6 grade ) are misleading the collector - both too liberal in my opinion............YAZ HAD ONLY ONE SHIPMENT OF BLONDE C271 BATS IN 1983 - 12 pieces on AUGUST 12th - WIDE GRAIN NATURAL FINISH BATS - Dave and Troy - why did you even grade this bat????????????????? The bat in auction does not match what he ordered his last year in 1983?! In my opinion, he never used this bat in a game.........

Back to my third point - do your own homework. Don't rely on anyone but yourself. If you have any question on an item - ask around and get some answers and if you are still not satisfied - pass on it. I personally am tired of MEARS beating their chest on how great they are and yet they continue to grade things incorrectly or too liberally ( as is the case with the Yaz bat above )............

Jim

[trsent]

eric: agreed. i would take whatever information you feel is handy from the authentication but getting into a lather over the grade seems to be a waste. a2 a5 a10 it all means the same - nothing.

joel: the only 2 names on the loas are bushing and troy. while i can't account for every single worksheet MEARS has ever done, i'll say that the only signature i've ever seen on them is bushings'. hence my conclusion. if my signature is on the loa and the worksheet then i must've been the one to authenticate it. a database, as you know, is only as good as the data inputed. i have serious reservations about the quality of the MEARS database after seeing the items that have slipped past it. once, for example, i emailed troy to correct a "1993" mcgwire they had authenticated. i said it was a 1996. troy emailed me and explained the error by saying they didn't have necessary images in their database. (of course these images were all over getty). so they don't have a 1996 oakland jersey in their database but a 1933 chicago bears is apparently no problem? wow.
regarding me working with mears: i've absolutely nothing to gain from that. i help them for free and they in turn charge others for the very information i've given them? i think my time is better spent here discussing jerseys rather than listening to dave grob show me why he would've made a great used car salesman. however, i agree with not being all over bushing. i genuinely hope this the last i speak of mears. i don't find them relevant in the least. lets talk jerseys!
fyi: my list from mastro isn't meant to question the authenticity of any of their items. rather, it's simply meant to show the shocking variety of items bushing authenticates. grob has admitted they don't have specialized experts in all of these fields. hence you get a bat expert looking at jerseys. hence you get a 1996 mcgwire jersey being authenticated as a 1993. at any rate, no more mears. let's move on!

rudy.

Rudy, someone called me yesterday and asked if you and Michael O'Keeffe are the same person. Your arguments all sound the same.

Your post and Jim's post show that some people will never accept MEARS no matter how hard they try. Sure, errors are going to be made, and it's how you correct the error when it is made that makes your reputation strong.

I asked you to ask your questions of MEARS on their web site, but you rather tear them apart on this forum because you know they will not respond to you here. Basically it appears you are making the accusations that they are intentionally making an error once every few thousand authentications, which is in no way proved to be the case. Why you dislike a company where Dave Grob stands behind their work like a true professional and then he is compared to a used car salesman is just plain low.

I appreciate your side, but I do not feel you are being fair in your assessments. If you do not like the way they work, start something better yourself. I remember I offered to start a company with you over a year ago and you said this was a hobby and you didn't wish to start a photo style matching authentication service.

The knowledge of this industry has changed because of the concepts of MEARS. The knowledge of this industry has changed because of Rudy's ground-breaking techniques for photo style matching and other hard work. Both sides are great for this industry, but to put down the MEARS letters of authenticity and their entire concept without talking to MEARS directly about your concern shows that you do not want to work with them to make this a better situation and that is sad because I respect both MEARS and yourself.

[JimCaravello]

Joel - I think you are missing some of my points............

First off - its not that I don't accept MEARS ( I believe the folks are MEARS are very knowledgeable ) - In my opinion, I believe they are careless with how they authenticate material in the marketplace as evidenced by the Yaz bat I mentioned in my original post as well as the Righetti jersey. These are just two items I mention and I have seen other discrepancies in the past that I scratch my head on including the various items that have been discussed on this Forum.

If you consider this bashing MEARS - that's fine - I look at it as constructive criticism. Those guys know so much - yet in my opinion, I believe their SOPS and how they authenticate material needs to be re-examined.

Back to Yaz for a moment. The Yaz COA is in conflict with itself. The COA clearly says the bat was used during the Regular Season, and then goes on to say that the bat does not have any characteristics that can be attributed to Yaz. They also go on to say that the bat matches records ordered by Baseball Promotions and not by the Red Sox or Yaz. Yet they grade this bat A6? As a buyer looking at two Yaz bats - this one and let's assume a legitimate factory documented Yaz bat with light use that they would grade A6, shouldn't there be a distinction in the grades between the two bats? Forget for a moment my opinion on the bat never being in Yaz's hands or that I really believe its from 1984 or 1985 - these points are irrelevant - how can you grade this bat A6? It does not match factory records for Yaz or have use characteristics attributed to Yaz and to top it all off, the Vintage Authentics auction description says that Yaz used this bat in 1983! In my opinion, both Vintage and MEARS are sloppy and careless in the presentation and final grade of the COA as well as the auction Listing.

Secondly - you are correct - everyone is entitled to a mistake or two. The problem in my opinion with MEARS is that they make a lot of mistakes and yet you continue to give them a free pass because of the knowledge they are sharing and what they have done for the hobby? Are we not allowed to discuss deficiencies of any authenticator on this website? How can you continue to give them this free pass when you read posts like mine or others that we have all seen in the past?

I am pretty knowledgeable about bats from certain time periods and I am fortunate enough to have records and information that 99% of the hobby does not have - and I share everything I know to all in the hobby, yet no one has accused me of making a mistake when I look at a bat. If I don't know something - I tell you and I help you find the answer to your questions. If I make a mistake, I want to know about it and I don't want a free pass.......

The knowledge of the industry has changed because of MEARS and Rudy and most definitely Game Used Universe - but when people make numerous errors, those examples need to be discussed to continue to educate the collector. Jim

[hblakewolf]

Rudy-
Is this current EBAY McGwire the jersey in question?

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@patmedia.net

[quote=kingjammy24]eric: agreed. i would take whatever information you feel is handy from the authentication but getting into a lather over the grade seems to be a waste. a2 a5 a10 it all means the same - nothing.

joel: the only 2 names on the loas are bushing and troy. while i can't account for every single worksheet MEARS has ever done, i'll say that the only signature i've ever seen on them is bushings'. hence my conclusion. if my signature is on the loa and the worksheet then i must've been the one to authenticate it. a database, as you know, is only as good as the data inputed. i have serious reservations about the quality of the MEARS database after seeing the items that have slipped past it. once, for example, i emailed troy to correct a "1993" mcgwire they had authenticated. i said it was a 1996. troy emailed me and explained the error by saying they didn't have necessary images in their database. (of course these images were all over getty). so they don't have a 1996 oakland jersey in their database but a 1933 chicago bears is apparently no problem? wow.
regarding me working with mears: i've absolutely nothing to gain from that. i help them for free and they in turn charge others for the very information i've given them? i think my time is better spent here discussing jerseys rather than listening to dave grob show me why he would've made a great used car salesman. however, i agree with not being all over bushing. i genuinely hope this the last i speak of mears. i don't find them relevant in the least. lets talk jerseys!
fyi: my list from mastro isn't meant to question the authenticity of any of their items. rather, it's simply meant to show the shocking variety of items bushing authenticates. grob has admitted they don't have specialized experts in all of these fields. hence you get a bat expert looking at jerseys. hence you get a 1996 mcgwire jersey being authenticated as a 1993. at any rate, no more mears. let's move on!

rudy.[/quote]

[hblakewolf]

Sorry-here is the Ebay McGwire link:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=220014120882

Rudy-
Is this current EBAY McGwire the jersey in question?

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@patmedia.net

[quote=kingjammy24]eric: agreed. i would take whatever information you feel is handy from the authentication but getting into a lather over the grade seems to be a waste. a2 a5 a10 it all means the same - nothing.

joel: the only 2 names on the loas are bushing and troy. while i can't account for every single worksheet MEARS has ever done, i'll say that the only signature i've ever seen on them is bushings'. hence my conclusion. if my signature is on the loa and the worksheet then i must've been the one to authenticate it. a database, as you know, is only as good as the data inputed. i have serious reservations about the quality of the MEARS database after seeing the items that have slipped past it. once, for example, i emailed troy to correct a "1993" mcgwire they had authenticated. i said it was a 1996. troy emailed me and explained the error by saying they didn't have necessary images in their database. (of course these images were all over getty). so they don't have a 1996 oakland jersey in their database but a 1933 chicago bears is apparently no problem? wow.
regarding me working with mears: i've absolutely nothing to gain from that. i help them for free and they in turn charge others for the very information i've given them? i think my time is better spent here discussing jerseys rather than listening to dave grob show me why he would've made a great used car salesman. however, i agree with not being all over bushing. i genuinely hope this the last i speak of mears. i don't find them relevant in the least. lets talk jerseys!
fyi: my list from mastro isn't meant to question the authenticity of any of their items. rather, it's simply meant to show the shocking variety of items bushing authenticates. grob has admitted they don't have specialized experts in all of these fields. hence you get a bat expert looking at jerseys. hence you get a 1996 mcgwire jersey being authenticated as a 1993. at any rate, no more mears. let's move on!

rudy.

[/quote]

[CollectGU]

Joel,

I often agree with you, but not necessarily on MEARS, and going to them directly with concerns. Did you read my thread on their site about the Yogi berra mask, where when I questioned the item, they began deleting my posts like children because I didn't follow the "rules". They never answered my questions either..Check it out if you have a chance under pg. 4 of the Baseball section of their website bulletin board