Dave,

As I began to type my response to you, Denny Esken called me again. You have said that I'm not objective (which is an unfair statement on your part, but what is new?). So, I'd like to offer the following objective & factual commentary, based on tonight's conversation with Denny:

1) It is not a battle of authenticators as to the issue of game use. No authenticator that has been solicited thus far (though you can keep on trying) has been willing to say that Ripken used the glove.

2) The glove was manufactured in 1999, which is a fact, based on the four dots and the other model characteristics. Ripken moved to a larger glove prior to the beginning of the 2000 season (and used the larger glove during the 2000 and 2001 seasons), so the only possible season that the glove could have been worn is 1999. Denny has seen a multitude of this model glove, though Ripken played only 86 games in 1999. How many of these 4-dot gloves could he have used in 86 games?

3) Denny stated that the use characteristics of your glove are "nothing" like Ripken's typical use characteristics, including "grease" in the palm and a tight web.

4) Glove experts Clevenhagen and Phillips were unable to date the glove to 1999, but rather chose "1990s." (though, to their credit, they were able to pinpoint the decade in which the glove was manufactured).

5) Denny has talked with Clevenhagen about the glove. Both agree that the substance in the palm is not oil. They both insist that it is the synthetic grease that bonds the palm of the glove to the lining to "give the glove feel."

I think you should call Clevenhagen, Denny, or Joe, and ask them point blank: "What do you think the chances are that Ripken used this glove?" Let us know the results (as it's a real mystery).

Best,
Reid