Lemon ball too good to be true?

[Ghumbs]

I bought this ball from a bi-annual flea market/antique show here in Washington State this weekend. The seller had a lot of interesting items, most of which were not sports related, but he appeared to be reputable.

He said he purchased this ball around 25 years ago from an antique shop in Illinois. It's in amazing shape, which is why I was hesitant to purchase it, but in the end I decided not to pass on it. The ball is softer than a normal baseball. He said he worked it some to make it round, but it was more egg shaped when he bought it.

Does anyone know what I have here? Real deal? Repro? I don't know if there are certain attributes to look for when dating these but any help would be...helpful Thanks!

[william_9]

It's a modern ball made for use in 1860s rules play. Looks to have been made to look older than it is. Could easily be 25 years old though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ghumbs]

Originally Posted by william_9

It's a modern ball made for use in 1860s rules play. Looks to have been made to look older than it is. Could easily be 25 years old though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the info and I trust you know a thing or two about these types of balls. What gives it away as modern?

[murphusa]

Originally Posted by Ghumbs

Thanks for the info and I trust you know a thing or two about these types of balls. What gives it away as modern?

William knows

[Ghumbs]

Originally Posted by murphusa

William knows

Sure. I was just hoping to learn something out of the experience.

[vintagesportscollector]

As you said, to good to be true, it's modern IMO. You are best off familiarizing yourself with what a 150 year old ball would look like, even under the best conditions. Here is a good source of examples:

http://www.baseballglovecollector.co...on-peel-balls/

Here is the best condition ball I think I have ever seen, and at least the leather and thread show some age.

image.jpg

[Ghumbs]

Thanks, that's a really good link. When I come across balls like these, it makes me doubt my doubts. Mine doesn't appear to be too far off of the examples below. Now obviously I'm going to be the most biased here, but does it basically come down to provenance on these since they aren't marked? Or are there certain attributes to look for other than condition like materials, techniques, etc?

[vintagesportscollector]

Originally Posted by Ghumbs

Thanks, that's a really good link. When I come across balls like these, it makes me doubt my doubts. Mine doesn't appear to be too far off of the examples below. Now obviously I'm going to be the most biased here, but does it basically come down to provenance on these since they aren't marked? Or are there certain attributes to look for other than condition like materials, techniques, etc?

Good questions, but I think you are seeing what you want to see. What about the other 100 examples on that site that look nothing like your ball?? It doesn't come down to provenance, it basically comes down to condition and age of the leather and thread, and yours looks like it was made yesterday. I thought you might hone in on those two examples. To be honest not sure the authenticity of everything on that site can be confirmed, but the top ball picture is blurry so you can't really tell the condition, and I don't think the bottom ball looks like yours - it at least shows some age.

You should also know that these balls are reproduced a lot today for use in playing vintage rules ball - as a couple people have told you.

Hope this helps some.

[Ghumbs]

Originally Posted by vintagesportscollector

Good questions, but I think you are seeing what you want to see. What about the other 100 examples on that site that look nothing like your ball?? It doesn't come down to provenance, it basically comes down to condition and age of the leather and thread, and yours looks like it was made yesterday. I thought you might hone in on those two examples. To be honest not sure the authenticity of everything on that site can be confirmed, but the top ball picture is blurry so you can't really tell the condition, and I don't think the bottom ball looks like yours - it at least shows some age.

You should also know that these balls are reproduced a lot today for use in playing vintage rules ball - as a couple people have told you.

Hope this helps some.

While it's true I want to see this as a nice example of an 1860s ball, I really want to know more about what to look for. Generally with these types of things, the simplest answer is the truth. But on the off chance this ball was never used and always kept in a box all those years, i don't imagine the leather would have aged much at all. Now the likelihood of that being the case is low, but it does seem plausible.

Am I hearing that this ball is not authentic because it's in too good of condition? Or is there something else that is more concrete like the way it was stitched or the tanning of the leather?

I have come across many of the reproductions in my research, but none of them matched the same leather or stitching of this one.

[Baseball Glove Collector]

Great thread guys. Grant, unfortunately, I agree with the consensus. I know you are looking for concrete explanations on how to tell if a ball is that old but I don't think any of us can tell you definitively. You just have to familiarize yourself with all the known exemplars I guess or see a bunch in person.

More often than not, they are crude, not uniform and nowhere near perfectly stitched. They were all handmade in different fashions by spouses of players, blacksmiths, saddle makers, etc.

I have a number of reproductions because they are so cool looking and they display well. Fun to talk to others about the evolution of the ball.

I would respect William's opinion above all else as I consider him an expert in this matter. You and Joe brought up a good point about those two suspect balls on my site. Now that I look back, I have my doubts too.

So, should I take those down guys? If you see any others that may be reproductions, please let me know so I can remove them. Appreciate it.

JD
www.baseballglovecollector.com

[william_9]

Sorry, I'm on vacation... The pattern matches up perfectly with modern recreations which favor manufacturing simplicity and durability over accuracy. While it's certainly possible for a homemade lemon peel from the middle of the 19c to have large stitches, most stitches on genuine examples tend to be on the smaller side. The pattern on your ball is very uniform as well, also a sign of a newer ball. There are a lot of outlets for these modern balls with this pattern. To my knowledge, all are made in China and most likely by the same factory. If yours is 20-30 years old, it probably has real leather, and may have even been made in America, but I can't say for certain. Real leather will tone and/or darken with time and use. Yours probably started life as a brown ball and developed its surface over the course of a game or two, maybe longer. I wouldn't rule out the possibility of additional aging if someone were inclined to deceive after the fact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[khkco4bls]

guys like me know it's a repro. Modern ball. You need to know stitching etc. Those were usually if not always hand sewn. Here are real examples.

[1880nonsports]

a few more from an older pic........

btw - no question your ball isn't an old and original lemon peel. Beside the uniformity of the holes and how the "thread" is sitting in the holes, obvious lack of age (what would be 120 - 150 year old leather and cloth stitching) and general "feel" - it can be linked to the style and production of a modern day ball.........

some things just come to be understood after some time and experience.

[Ghumbs]

Amazing examples guys. Thanks for the photos and additional information. I agree the ball is a lemon, but not a lemon ball

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by Ghumbs

The seller had a lot of interesting items, most of which were not sports related, but he appeared to be reputable.

He said he purchased this ball around 25 years ago from an antique shop in Illinois.

Unrelated, this reminds me of all the calls I've gotten over the years, at least a couple dozen, describing to me this huge collection of Ring Magazines they've had passed down to them, covering anywhere from the 1970's to the 1990's.

Just by coincidence they just so happen to have the very first issue of Ring Magazine published in 1922. Not the 2nd issue, or 3rd issue or any other issues from the 1920's.......but the 1st.....and it's in Mint condition.

I have to explain to them there's a 99.999% chance it's a reprint that Ring Magazine put out in 1991 to celebrate their upcoming 70th Anniversary. It's supposedly made from the original printing plates. Almost an exact replica in every way except it's smaller format, and on obviously newer paper.

I had one guy explain to me, his Grandfather would never have a reprint in his collection, and that he's had this for at least 25 years. I had to calmly explain to him that 1991 was 25 years ago.

I'm pretty sure the guy swore at me, and then hung up the phone.

On a related note, from all the old boxing gloves I've handled over the years, any leather product anywhere near the age of that ball is supposed to be, would have extensive crackling to it, even if it was used very little.