Provenance for "Game Used" balls, quite speculative at best?

[markf31]

IMO its almost impossible to prove provenance on vintage "game used" baseballs, is it not? How can an auction house describe a vintage ball as being "game used" without provenance beyond the consignor simply stating that it was "game used". Maybe I'm missing something?

[Scott Garner]

IMO its almost impossible to prove provenance on vintage "game used" baseballs, is it not? How can an auction house describe a vintage ball as being "game used" without provenance beyond the consignor simply stating that it was "game used". Maybe I'm missing something?

Mark,
Interesting question!

Without a player, team or umpire writing a letter of provenance to accompany said ball it is a leap of faith. Occasionally a player will write info on the ball which provides the provenance. I believe that each item needs to be considered independently with regards to the likelihood of it actually being game used. I will say that many AH's use the term "game used" sparingly where others are very liberal with using this label. Without naming names, one AH currently has a bevy of "game balls" that, after looking at them carefully, I doubt the authenticity of many of them.

As you are probably aware, MLB now actually pulls items, balls, bases, equipment directly out of games and catalogues them along with holograms for authentication purposes. I personally do not collect these items, but many collectors do.

FWIW, when building my own collection of milestone game balls related to no-hitters and power pitching I have been very selective of which ones I pick up.
Very few make the cut...

[packs]

I only have one vintage game used ball and I only bought it because of the provenance. This is the final pitch from a June 15, 1926 game between the A's and the Indians for Rube Walberg's 15th career win. The baseball was accompanied by a letter from Walberg's daughter attesting to it's authenticity:

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m294/madjams/95DBB61D-C176-420F-856D-F5EF67B889F6_zpstgf67mkd.jpg

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m294/madjams/B62CABED-797A-4A06-B190-1334418A0F35_zps74ngwktt.jpg

[sayhey24]

Totally agree with Scott. Without a letter, each ball has to be judged differently -- does it pass the smell test? I usually feel pretty good about vintage writing on the ball.

Greg
www.baseballbasement.com

[Lordstan]

This is mine. Is purported to be a foul ball hit by Gehrig in 1929. On most of these, no one can say for sure. Unless the owner catches the ball themselves, you can't know.
I also like vintage writing that is under shellac that appears aged. I don't think most people in the past were looking at these items to make money, so I "trust" that writing more.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v222/lordstan/My%20Lou%20Gehrig%20stuff/gehrigfoulball2.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v222/lordstan/My%20Lou%20Gehrig%20stuff/gehrigfoulball.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v222/lordstan/My%20Lou%20Gehrig%20stuff/gehrigfoulball4.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v222/lordstan/My%20Lou%20Gehrig%20stuff/gehrigfoulball3.jpg

[71buc]

I have posted this one before. Other then modern MLB authenticated balls this is the only game used ball currently in my collection. Although I feel confident about the provenance, I purchased it from "John" the gentleman who caught the ball and had it signed after the game, I don't believe anyone can be certain about such items.

Ironically a close friend of mine is the brother-in-law of Todd McFarlane who as you know purchased McGwire's #70 HR ball for 2.7 million. http://www.teako170.com/70th.html I asked my friend how McFarlane justified spending that kind of money especially in light of the steroid issue that has tarnished McGwire's accomplishment. He said that the ball was purchased for the publicity. He said the amount and value of free prime time network and print media advertising it brought to McFarlane's company far exceeded the amount of money spent on it. When the steroid scandal gained national attention the ball's and it's owner were in the news all over again.

[drcy]

One thing is that with the antique baseball and football 'trophy' balls (the painted up kind) were almost always game used balls. And besides, they have value whether or not the were actually game used. Much to most of their value is in their being quasi-trophies or presentation items. Even if a 1905 Yale Versus Harvard trophy ball turned out not to have been game used, it will still have significant value.

It comes down to what you pay and what you bought it as. If you buy a 'game used' team signed ball at the only the team signed value level and as a team signed ball, the game use or lack thereof is a relatively minor issue. It's only a signiricant issue if you double or triple what you pay due to the speculated game use. Or say you buy a modern baseball jersey and you don't know if it was game used or merely team issued. No big concern if you pay at the team issued pricing level. Obviously a pressing issue if you bought it at the game used pricing level.

It also depends how much you pay for speculation. There's a difference between adding a 10% premium to what you pay for an otherwise standard Houston Astros team signed ball because the unprovable story is it was used in a MLB game versus adding a 400% premium for the story.

[Wildfireschulte]

FYI - the Mears auction ending tonight has dozens of "game used balls". They seem believable as they are pretty affordable. If a collector was going fabricate a story, I wouldn't think it would be "foul ball by Garry Maddox".

I am neither a conseignor or owner of Mears - but I found you can get great deals on a wide variety of memorabilia in Troy's auctions - almost like a flea market - this month is especially loaded.