MLB authentication Homework

[soxfan]

First of all, let me say I have NOTHING against this Ebay seller, and the helmet seems legit, but this is the MLB Authentication problem.

If you dont do your homework on this helmet and buy it based solely on what the MLB database says, you will be dissapointed.

Alex Cora didnt see any action during game #4 in 2007 WS, and he was only on the field in 1 game.

Now, that said, helmet is great, but not what the MLB database says it is.

So, what are the feelings about the MLB system?

Would love to hear feedback.

Jeremy
macleodjeremy@hotmail.com

http://cgi.ebay.com/2007-Red-Sox-Gam...item27b770686a

[Dach0sen0ne]

Considering the Series only went 4 games I dont see a problem with it being authenticated after game 4/the final game. Would you have liked them to authenticate everyone's helmet before the series was over? Also, check your stats cause Cora had a sacrifice in game 3 and I think you need a helmet for that.

[LWMM]

The helmet is authenticated by MLB only as a "GAME-USED BATTING HELMET"; it is not attributed to any specific game. The session date and name imply that a number of items were authenticated following game 4 of the World Series, which was also the last game that the Red Sox played in 2007 (as they won the Series by winning that game).

Most likely, items from throughout the season--batting helmets included--were authenticated in that session, as they would not be needed for any more games. Cora probably wore this helmet during the 2007 season, but it was only authenticated following a game in which he did not play. Cora did get a sacrifice hit in game 3, and it is possible that he wore the offered helmet during that at bat.

[lakeerie92]

MLB authentication is what you make of it. The helmet was clearly authenticated with everything within reach at the end of the game being the last game of the season. I just bought a bat that says it was broken in the 8th inning of a game on a single, but it wasn't used in the 8th inning it was cracked in the previous at bat. I knew all of this when I bought the bat, but I did my research and photomatched it. I have a 2008 Yankees final season game used ball that is authenticated as game used and signed by Derek Jeter, but it was never signed by anyone. Just got to do your homework. I am willing to bet you can photomatch it to the sacrifice in game 3.

[xpress34]

It's like my Mike McKenry 2010 Home White Vest (Cool Base) from the Colorado Rockies.

The MLB Authentication says:


Hologram number FJ182823 was located in the MLB Authentication Database under GAME-USED JERSEY.

Session Product Description:

Session Name: LAD at COL
Session Date: September 29, 2010
Autographer:
Authenticator: AUTHENTICATORS, INC.
Additional Information: COLORADO ROCKIES – MICHAEL MCKENRY

That was the Rockies Final Home Game of 2010.

But the jersey has been photomatched to McKenry's MLB DEBUT on Sept 8, 2010.

McKenry only started ONE game (on the road) and only had a handful of at bats after his September call up.

I'm sure many other Rox jerseys were tagged the same way (last home game) as well.

- Smitty

[xpress34]

Forgot to add...

McKenry did not play in that Final Home Game either...

Here's a link to the Box Score:

LA @ COL 9/29/10

All the best -

Smitty

[coxfan]

I've done spot-checking on MLB Authentication for the last few years, using such game info as I could get. (eg from MLB.com) I always do some research on anything I buy, using the sequence of hologram numbers for that game as added information.

My impression is that they've gotten very careful and meticulous this year about documenting provenance, and that's great for g-u balls. That means less guesswork, which in turn results in more concerns about the "issued" vs "used" jerseys; but I personally think it's better to be more careful and document only what's seen.

One interesting exception was the last ball of the Rangers' win over the Yankees in the ALCS. (I think it was game 2.) The authenticator expressly noted that he was basing the authentication on Nolan Ryan's statement he'd received the ball from the fielder. In the past, the authenticator might have left out that detail of authentication of a ball he couldn't personally verify.

In past years, there were occasional clerical errors and some ambiguities that could've been avoided. But I've been satisfied with the documentation of all the items I've purchased, though I suspect one of them (a bat), had an ambiguity in the date. (The hologram implied but didn't state it was broken on Jackie Robinson Day in 2007. But I suspect it was used that game, but broken the next game.)

On the whole, I think it's a great system that's getting better.