1996 Alex Rodriguez Game Used & Signed HR #15 Bat

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

I don't see why MEARS would have a problem to remove that statement from the LOO. It doesn't serve a purpose to mention no photo match found.

Arod stated so himself!

[trsent]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

Tony, your LOA and the bat itself are great. I will assume there are no issues with A-Rod's bat. That doesn't mean every item he has autographed as "Game Used" is game used, but there have been speculations about some items he autographed "Game Used" that may not be such. I believe these were all jerseys, but I may be mistaken.

I believe with your A10 grade you should not be concerned, as you know Troy is anal and if he feels he needs to mention after all his work he couldn't find a photo-match, but he still signed off on a perfect grade, that he wants to mention such in the LOA you shouldn't worry. No one will use this fact against you if you ever look to resell the bat.

Why the need for a MEARS letter when you have all the other documentation?

I have a friend who has a similar theory. He always asks me why I would take a jersey with a team letter and have MEARS also authenticate the item. Personally, I often find the extra letter helps the item sell for more money as some team/player letters have been suspect in the past.

Also, MEARS writes great looking, detailed letters.

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

Tony, I am confused, you state that not every pitch, at bat or inning is was photographed or videotaped in 1996?

I am pretty sure every pitch, at bat, inning and game was in some part photographed and for all part videotaped for television broadcast and re-broadcast.

I do not know why Troy decided to mention the lack of a photo-match, but I guess they were just being through.

What final grade did they offer your bat?

They may be photographed and/or videotaped, however, look how difficult they are to find. Many things can't be photo matched.

In my case, I don't see the need. Again, Arod provided details that match the Baseball Almanac and Toronto Sun Newspaper.

I asked Tory to remove the comments, which would not hurt the integrity of his authentication of this bat.

Quote from John Taube: If the bat has shows Arod characteristics it is probable that it was used by him. It's impossible to find photos of every bat he's used.

I agree 100%

[kingjammy24]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

tony

i understand your point. to paraphrase, why did mears even bother including that statement? it's a meaningless statement that only implies an unnecessary negative.

perhaps it's mears policy to try to photomatch every item they get and for those that are unsuccessful, they include that on the LOA?

that said, here's what i wonder: when troy and dave wrote their LOA for their $70k jim brown jersey, did they also add the statement "tried to photomatch this jim brown jersey and couldn't"? or would such a statement, as appears on your LOA, have detracted from their jersey?

why would that statement appear on your LOA and not on the LOA of every item they tried to photomatch but couldn't? i agree that unless it's their corporate policy to include it on every LOA, it's an odd statement to include on yours.

rudy.

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

Tony, your LOA and the bat itself are great. I will assume there are no issues with A-Rod's bat. That doesn't mean every item he has autographed as "Game Used" is game used, but there have been speculations about some items he autographed "Game Used" that may not be such. I believe these were all jerseys, but I may be mistaken.

I believe with your A10 grade you should not be concerned, as you know Troy is anal and if he feels he needs to mention after all his work he couldn't find a photo-match, but he still signed off on a perfect grade, that he wants to mention such in the LOA you shouldn't worry. No one will use this fact against you if you ever look to resell the bat.

I have a friend who has a similar theory. He always asks me why I would take a jersey with a team letter and have MEARS also authenticate the item. Personally, I often find the extra letter helps the item sell for more money as some team/player letters have been suspect in the past.

Also, MEARS writes great looking, detailed letters.

Yes, Troy is anal and so am I. I understand, especially with everything being questioned these days, that photo matching is such a big deal.

If he removes the statement, as the customer requests, it doesn't hurt the integrity of his authentication. It can't come back to hurt him as an authenticator.

Yes, MEARS does an awesome job with writing very detail LOO's. That's why I wanted one. Once document that covers all documentation.

No issues with this bat. Documentation is solid.

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

tony

i understand your point. to paraphrase, why did mears even bother including that statement? it's a meaningless statement that only implies an unnecessary negative.

perhaps it's mears policy to try to photomatch every item they get and for those that are unsuccessful, they include that on the LOA?

that said, here's what i wonder: when troy and dave wrote their LOA for their $70k jim brown jersey, did they also add the statement "tried to photomatch this jim brown jersey and couldn't"? or would such a statement, as appears on your LOA, have detracted from their jersey?

why would that statement appear on your LOA and not on the LOA of every item they tried to photomatch but couldn't? i agree that unless it's their corporate policy to include it on every LOA, it's an odd statement to include on yours.

rudy.

Rudy,

Well said! Thank you!!!!

As the customer and owner of this bat, I do agree 100% that it's a meaningless statement that only implies an unnecessary negative.

That's exactly how I took it and I'm not happy with the statement in the LOO.

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

why would that statement appear on your LOA and not on the LOA of every item they tried to photomatch but couldn't? i agree that unless it's their corporate policy to include it on every LOA, it's an odd statement to include on yours.

rudy.

If it is or becomes their corporate policy to do so, I will never use them again.

[David]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

From a practical matter, the MEARS letter supports the general authenticity of the bat and the AROD LOA, if not specifying a specific date. At sale or auction, most buyers or bidders would interpret the MEARS letter as a positive addition to the overall documentation. MEARS is saying its a game used AROD bat, and most bidders and buyers would say that supports the contention of Rodriguez. Obviously, if the letter said it didn't look like a game used Rodriguez bat, then there would be a problem.

In other words, with all the documentation-- including AROD's letter giving specific date and homer run #--, I don't believe most would consider there to be any practical problem in the MEARS letter. In fact, I believe most would consider the MEARS LOO supportive of the AROD LOA.

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

From a practical matter, the MEARS letter supports the general authenticity of the bat and the AROD LOA, if not specifying a specific date. At sale or auction, most buyers or bidders would interpret the MEARS letter as a positive addition to the overall documentation. MEARS is saying its a game used AROD bat, and most bidders and buyers would say that supports the contention of Rodriguez. Obviously, if the letter said it didn't look like a game used Rodriguez bat, then there would be a problem.

In other words, with all the documentation-- including AROD's letter giving specific date and homer run #--, I don't believe most would consider there to be any practical problem in the MEARS letter. In fact, I believe most would consider the MEARS LOO supportive of the AROD LOA.

Understand. As the paying customer and owner of this bat, I would prefer the comment not to be in the LOO.

Just becuause MEARS couldn't find one, doesn't mean there isn't one. They also mention they found photos of Arod using a LVS around that time, which implies he used a LVS and not a Rawlings. To me, that sounds as if Arod was using a LVS around that time and not a Rawlings.

I believe, depending on each individuals interpretation, some may read that as Arod using a LVS bat and not a Rawlings bat during that period.

As Rudy stated, it's an unnecessary negative.

Just to be clear, I have no problems with MEARS or Troy. Nothing but great service. We just have a difference of opinion on this statement. That's why we brought it to GUU.

Let me ask you all this. Do you see a problem and/or a big issue with MEARS removing this statement?

Regards, Tony

[Fraudfinder!!]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

Open discussion regardings 1996 Alex Rodriguez HR bat

November 20 2008 at 2:14 PM Troy R. Kinunen (Login Troyrkinunen)Recently we were asked to officially grade a 1996 Alex Rodriguez bat with HR attribution that was first examined by our staff while operating as SCDA. For a very short period during 2004, SCDA worked with the auction houses in a similar manner that the PSA bat division and both JSA and PSA evaluates autographs. That manner was we would offer an auction house letter. These precursory evaluations only guaranteed that bats examined were professional models. A disclaimer was added to the letter stating that SCDA was not responsible for the auction house writeup.



2004 seams like 100 years ago. MEARS has pioneered many advances since, with the one issue relating to this bat. SCDA, now MEARS, soon there after refused to offer precursory evaluations. We mandated to the auction houses that ALL items had to be fully graded or we would not do the work. This had a major impact on items recieving low grades. We would not allow auction houses to pick and chose which items recieved grades. It was our position that there was a potential to confuse collectors what were buying items with MEARS letters, that would actually be very low grade examples. This has never happened due to our policy. I have heard many horror stories of first time buyers buying a game used Mickey Mantle bat with an auction house letter, to later submit the bat to find that it graded very low due to a myriad of undisclosed issues. This led to several houses no longer using our services. Other evaluators still offer the water downed auction house letters.



Now that this bat, first graded by us as SCDA, has re-entered the hobby, we evaluated the bat using all of our modern resources.



For those interested, the letter I provided stated:



Year: 1996. The factory stamp found on the knob denotes this. Rawlings marked the year of production by adding the last two digits of a year, 1996. This appeared as 96 and was the last two numbers on the knob.



Centerbrand: the style of the centerbrand, Rawlings, MADE IN USA, ADIRDONDACK, white ring was consistent with bats issued by Rawlings during 1996 and can be verified via the MEARS centerbrand index.



Model: The knob of the bat has the model number, 460B, batch number, 149, and year code, 96. Rawlings factory records indicate that Rodriguez ordered a total of 12 460B Black Lacquer model bats that are consistent with this bat's specifications.



Length: Although not specifically mentioned in the letter from Rawlings signed by Bill Steele, Professional Bat Operations Supervisor, the model was acknowledged as being used by Rodriguez, which was produced in this length by the factory. Therefore, it is assumed to be the length requested by Rodriguez.



Weight: Although not specifically mentioned in the letter from Rawlings signed by Bill Steele, Professional Bat Operations Supervisor, the model was acknowledged as being used by Rodriguez, which was produced in this weight by the factory. Therefore, it is assumed to be the length requested by Rodriguez.



Use: Bat exhibits heavy use with numerous ball marks present throughout the barrel. There are nine ball marks that display the transfer of ink, five of which have blue ball marks. The ball marks are deep, with have left impressions of the stitch marks, this is consistent with numerous other Alex Rodriquez bats examined by MEARS. A heavy coat of pine tar is present on the Rawlings centerbrand, which extends approximately 9 inches in length, and the handle, which extends 7 inches in length from the knob.



Provenance: The bat's game used and HR notation were provided with provenance directly from Alex Rodriguez. Rodriguez has autographed and inscribed "HR #15, 1996." on this bat in silver marker just to the right of the barrel signature. The signature is very bold and consistent with his circa 1996 style signatures. This bat comes with a LOA from AROD Authenticated signed by Rodriguez, which states the following:



I, Alex Rodriguez, hereby verify that this 460 B Black Rawlings was the bat that I used on June 25, 1996 when I hit my 15th homerun of the season, which was my 20th career homerun. This homerun was hit against the Toronto Blue Jays off of Erik Hanson."



AROD Authentication holograms, #5782, are present on both the end of the barrel and the AROD LOA. Per this LOA and Rodriguez's inscription this bat has been attributed to Rodriguez's 20th career home run.



MEARS conducted an attempt at photo matching the bat and at the time of the letter printing, (November 11, 2008) no available image of AROD with a black Rawlings bat could be found. Available images from the approximate timeframe, but not the June 25th, 1996 were available for our review. They showed Arod using a Black Louisville Slugger, but we had no success in our attempt to exactly photo match the date of the game with Arod using a Rawlings bat.



Date of Home run verification: A copy of the Baseball Almanac Box Score verifies HR #15 being hit by Alex Rodriguez on Tuesday, June 25th, 1996 at the Skydome.





Our reasons for offering the opinion regarding the photomatching was due to the fact that while attempting to photo match this bat, we discovered AROD used black H&B bats during the same relative timespan. We thought that was an important fact that should be included.



Any additional opinions regarding this bat and our evaluation are welcomed to be discussed on our bulletin board.



Regards,





Troy R. Kinunen

MEARS




This message has been edited by bridgettest on Nov 20, 2008 2:21 PM

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

Open discussion regardings 1996 Alex Rodriguez HR bat

November 20 2008 at 2:14 PM Troy R. Kinunen (Login Troyrkinunen)Recently we were asked to officially grade a 1996 Alex Rodriguez bat with HR attribution that was first examined by our staff while operating as SCDA. For a very short period during 2004, SCDA worked with the auction houses in a similar manner that the PSA bat division and both JSA and PSA evaluates autographs. That manner was we would offer an auction house letter. These precursory evaluations only guaranteed that bats examined were professional models. A disclaimer was added to the letter stating that SCDA was not responsible for the auction house writeup.

2004 seams like 100 years ago. MEARS has pioneered many advances since, with the one issue relating to this bat. SCDA, now MEARS, soon there after refused to offer precursory evaluations. We mandated to the auction houses that ALL items had to be fully graded or we would not do the work. This had a major impact on items recieving low grades. We would not allow auction houses to pick and chose which items recieved grades. It was our position that there was a potential to confuse collectors what were buying items with MEARS letters, that would actually be very low grade examples. This has never happened due to our policy. I have heard many horror stories of first time buyers buying a game used Mickey Mantle bat with an auction house letter, to later submit the bat to find that it graded very low due to a myriad of undisclosed issues. This led to several houses no longer using our services. Other evaluators still offer the water downed auction house letters.

Now that this bat, first graded by us as SCDA, has re-entered the hobby, we evaluated the bat using all of our modern resources.

For those interested, the letter I provided stated:

Year: 1996. The factory stamp found on the knob denotes this. Rawlings marked the year of production by adding the last two digits of a year, 1996. This appeared as 96 and was the last two numbers on the knob.

Centerbrand: the style of the centerbrand, Rawlings, MADE IN USA, ADIRDONDACK, white ring was consistent with bats issued by Rawlings during 1996 and can be verified via the MEARS centerbrand index.

Model: The knob of the bat has the model number, 460B, batch number, 149, and year code, 96. Rawlings factory records indicate that Rodriguez ordered a total of 12 460B Black Lacquer model bats that are consistent with this bat's specifications.

Length: Although not specifically mentioned in the letter from Rawlings signed by Bill Steele, Professional Bat Operations Supervisor, the model was acknowledged as being used by Rodriguez, which was produced in this length by the factory. Therefore, it is assumed to be the length requested by Rodriguez.

Weight: Although not specifically mentioned in the letter from Rawlings signed by Bill Steele, Professional Bat Operations Supervisor, the model was acknowledged as being used by Rodriguez, which was produced in this weight by the factory. Therefore, it is assumed to be the length requested by Rodriguez.

Use: Bat exhibits heavy use with numerous ball marks present throughout the barrel. There are nine ball marks that display the transfer of ink, five of which have blue ball marks. The ball marks are deep, with have left impressions of the stitch marks, this is consistent with numerous other Alex Rodriquez bats examined by MEARS. A heavy coat of pine tar is present on the Rawlings centerbrand, which extends approximately 9 inches in length, and the handle, which extends 7 inches in length from the knob.

Provenance: The bat's game used and HR notation were provided with provenance directly from Alex Rodriguez. Rodriguez has autographed and inscribed "HR #15, 1996." on this bat in silver marker just to the right of the barrel signature. The signature is very bold and consistent with his circa 1996 style signatures. This bat comes with a LOA from AROD Authenticated signed by Rodriguez, which states the following:

I, Alex Rodriguez, hereby verify that this 460 B Black Rawlings was the bat that I used on June 25, 1996 when I hit my 15th homerun of the season, which was my 20th career homerun. This homerun was hit against the Toronto Blue Jays off of Erik Hanson."

AROD Authentication holograms, #5782, are present on both the end of the barrel and the AROD LOA. Per this LOA and Rodriguez's inscription this bat has been attributed to Rodriguez's 20th career home run.

MEARS conducted an attempt at photo matching the bat and at the time of the letter printing, (November 11, 2008) no available image of AROD with a black Rawlings bat could be found. Available images from the approximate timeframe, but not the June 25th, 1996 were available for our review. They showed Arod using a Black Louisville Slugger, but we had no success in our attempt to exactly photo match the date of the game with Arod using a Rawlings bat.

Date of Home run verification: A copy of the Baseball Almanac Box Score verifies HR #15 being hit by Alex Rodriguez on Tuesday, June 25th, 1996 at the Skydome.

Our reasons for offering the opinion regarding the photomatching was due to the fact that while attempting to photo match this bat, we discovered AROD used black H&B bats during the same relative timespan. We thought that was an important fact that should be included.

Any additional opinions regarding this bat and our evaluation are welcomed to be discussed on our bulletin board.

Regards,

Troy R. Kinunen
MEARS

This message has been edited by bridgettest on Nov 20, 2008 2:21 PM

I just got this email from Troy: The statement about the bat being graded A10 by SCDA was not accurate. That was supplied by the auction house, as an auction house letter with no grade. Thus, we never guaranteed the language, as was printed on the letter.

Here's the SCDA LOA. The letter specifically states "Prior to consignment, this bat was submitted to SCD Authenticated and was given a grade of A10."

Troy signed the SCDA LOA.

Am I missing something?

Regards, Tony

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

Is Troy saying that he signed a blank SCDA LOA and then gave it to the auction house and they added the write up? Is that what he's really saying?

[3arod13]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

Received another email from Troy:

Please read the actual letter, and pay close attention to the box under my signature line, it reads, The item of sports memorabilia has been carefully examined by one or more experts at SCD Authentic . It is our expert opinion this item is authentic and gradable. SCD Authentic is not responsible for the auction house description. SCDA did not assign the A10 grade. I just wanted to clarify that point and it has no bearing on this.

With that said, Troy is stating that he signed a BLANK SCDA LOA, provided it to the auction house, and they then added the write-up.

Again, am I missing something?

[David]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

All I know is on this board some people say MEARS should add facts to letters, while others say facts should be removed. It seems MEARS is between a rock and a hard place if they wish to please this board.

If you want the verbage removed from the letter, it does bug me terribly. However, I can promise you that someone else on this board would castigate from suppressing the quote.

As has already been said, if a pic showing Rodriguez using the color bat, MEARS would probably amend the letter-- and the issue would become moot.

[David]

Re: MEARS & I ask for GUU's opinion/help

correction: removed, it doesn't bug me terribly ...