Babe Ruth mitt from youth in Goldins Next Auction

[botn]

Originally Posted by Leon

I think it might the, what I am told, thesis MEARS wrote on the glove in support of it being authentic.

That would not be correct. He deleted his posts on the Piazza thread too.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by botn

That would not be correct. He deleted his posts on the Piazza thread too.

A Winston Smith-like transformation.

[MetsBaseball1973]

Just an observation here. So many posts on hobby chat rooms like this site boil down, at their honest core, to bashing items, cards, etc..

In many of these bashing posts, there is a common denominator. The thing being bashed is expensive.

This makes me wonder how many posts are motivated deep down by jealousy, and wanting things one cannot afford.

Only a person knows the truth inside them, unless of course they are in denial. It is easy, psychologically, to see how wishing deep down that someone had something can lead to that someone bashing it.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by MetsBaseball1973

Just an observation here. So many posts on hobby chat rooms like this site boil down, at their honest core, to bashing items, cards, etc..

In many of these bashing posts, there is a common denominator. The thing being bashed is expensive.

This makes me wonder how many posts are motivated deep down by jealousy, and wanting things one cannot afford.

Only a person knows the truth inside them, unless of course they are in denial. It is easy, psychologically, to see how wishing deep down that someone had something can lead to that someone bashing it.

Or more likely we are wary of the "fish" tales that get told in this hobby. You're a fool if you're not skeptical. How much of Barry Halper's collection was just plain fraudulent? Al Stump was making instant Ty Cobb estate items out of thin air. The Hobby is healthier when questions are asked.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MetsBaseball1973

Just an observation here. So many posts on hobby chat rooms like this site boil down, at their honest core, to bashing items, cards, etc..

In many of these bashing posts, there is a common denominator. The thing being bashed is expensive.

This makes me wonder how many posts are motivated deep down by jealousy, and wanting things one cannot afford.

Only a person knows the truth inside them, unless of course they are in denial. It is easy, psychologically, to see how wishing deep down that someone had something can lead to that someone bashing it.

I don't believe that to be the case. Rather, it's because our hobby unfortunately over the years has had numerous frauds and people's radar are justifiably up.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Or more likely we are wary of the "fish" tales that get told in this hobby. You're a fool if you're not skeptical. How much of Barry Halper's collection was just plain fraudulent? Al Stump was making instant Ty Cobb estate items out of thin air. The Hobby is healthier when questions are asked.

Exactly. There's no need to be all that skeptical of very cheap items, like under $20 maybe more or less depending on your situation and the item.

But stuff that's going to be 10,000? Or well over 100,000? I'd want to really do my own checking on the item to spend that much.

On second thought.....Nevermind. I just realized I have the backup glove in my attic. Also for a right hander, also a kid size catchers mitt. I'll take a big hit and let it go for $75,000. Or maybe $75 if you ask nice.

Steve B

[botn]

Originally Posted by steve B

Exactly. There's no need to be all that skeptical of very cheap items, like under $20 maybe more or less depending on your situation and the item.

But stuff that's going to be 10,000? Or well over 100,000? I'd want to really do my own checking on the item to spend that much.

On second thought.....Nevermind. I just realized I have the backup glove in my attic. Also for a right hander, also a kid size catchers mitt. I'll take a big hit and let it go for $75,000. Or maybe $75 if you ask nice.

Steve B

With cards, it is the label. Does not matter if the card is floating in the holder as long as someone slabbed it and put a high grade on it. With GU stuff, I guess it is all about the story. If it sounds good and someone authenticates it, someone will be writing a check.

[botn]

As I suspected, Ron deleted his posts here and on the Piazza thread, because he was threatened by Goldin's lawyer. If you are going to question an item in Goldin's auction or question his ethics, you had better be prepared to lawyer up.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I guess the words "Cease and Desist" suggest he wasn't sending Ron a copy of the Mears report.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I guess the words "Cease and Desist" suggest he wasn't sending Ron a copy of the Mears report.

No but to make up for that the lawyer also sent Ron's employer a copy of the C & D letter. How charming.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Since everyone is spouting off about cease and desist letters, did anyone actually get one??

I guess the answer is yes.

[sbfinley]

Overkill much?

[dhernandez]

Originally Posted by botn

No but to make up for that the lawyer also sent Ron's employer a copy of the C & D letter. How charming.

That is completely absurd, what purpose does it serve by sending such a letter to his employer? This is true?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by dhernandez

That is completely absurd, what purpose does it serve by sending such a letter to his employer? This is true?

If true that does suck.

[DJR]

Not all that glitters is goldin

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by dhernandez

That is completely absurd, what purpose does it serve by sending such a letter to his employer? This is true?

Intimidation and revenge.

[yanks12025]

Thats pretty sad to send it to his employer. What are trying to do, cost the guy his job because of some posts on the internet. What a messed up hobby this is.

[slidekellyslide]

Wow....just wow.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by yanks12025

Thats pretty sad to send it to his employer. What are trying to do, cost the guy his job because of some posts on the internet. What a messed up hobby this is.

Business, not hobby.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Business, not hobby.

Still...might be the lowest thing any Net54 member has ever done. Well done Ken, well done.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Still...might be the lowest thing any Net54 member has ever done. Well done Ken, well done.

+++

I used to be a consignor with Goldin Auctions. I am not a big consignor, by any means, but this was the last straw.
I started having negative feelings about Ken after reading the shill list from Mastro and when this thread and the Goldin intimidation started that reinforced my feelings.
I considered Ken to be an ally in the fight against forgers. Someone who actually still had influence with the bay.
However, this has gone too far.
Bye Ken.
I am sure you will not be heartbroken over this but maybe this will make others here think about it too. I have already seen posts with similar misgivings.

[botn]

Originally Posted by dhernandez

That is completely absurd, what purpose does it serve by sending such a letter to his employer? This is true?

It is true. Goldin simply wants to run his auctions and not have anyone question anything he is selling or how he does business or runs GUU. And really in 2012 he went out of his way to let us know we can trust him, completely. http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=155017. Of course those posts were made after he had apparently been shill bidding in Mastro Auctions, according to government's list.

Anyway, here are just two of the many comments he made providing us assurance that all questionable business is in his past. In the second comment though he states he started out in the hobby when he was 11. This article however says he was 12.

[jefferyepayne]

My position hasn't changed since 2012



Everybody has to decide for themselves where to draw the line but I know where mine is. Take a stand.

jeff

[dhernandez]

Originally Posted by yanks12025

Thats pretty sad to send it to his employer. What are trying to do, cost the guy his job because of some posts on the internet. What a messed up hobby this is.

It is if it DID indeed happened, i agree. We do not even know if this is true

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by dhernandez

It is if it DID indeed happened, i agree. We do not even know if this is true

Gee do you think Greg who posted the cover email with certain names blacked out might know whose names were there?

[botn]

Originally Posted by dhernandez

It is if it DID indeed happened, i agree. We do not even know if this is true

David I know you recently changed your mind on the issues that have been raised but you obviously don't know me well if you actually think I would be so careless to make a post without fact checking especially when it pertains to a hobbyist who is handing out C and D letters.

[midmo]

[khkco4bls]

The thumb on the glove that Ruth is holding looks totally different than the other one where's the stitching around the thumb piece

[slidekellyslide]

Cease and desist now!!!!!1

[Michael B]

The image posted by Justin reconfirms what I said in my first post in this thread. The glove that Ruth is wearing is the photo is open across the three middle fingers. The glove shown for the auction is only open for the middle finger and the ring finger. I still stand by that opinion.

[slidekellyslide]

I insist that you cease and desist now!!!!!11!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Did MEARS allegedly match the glove to the photo?

[jhs5120]

Looking at those gloves next to each other....

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Looking at those gloves next to each other....

Nice edit...I think it just saved you from a Cease and Desist letter.

[uniship]

that might help clear matters up.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Did MEARS allegedly match the glove to the photo?

There are +/- 10 pages of MEARS authentication online with the ruth glove. There are some pages of PSA/DNA authentication too. I read them but didn't see either say they photo-matched it. MEARS said they didn't examine it in person but used hi res photos. On the other hand PSA/DNA used the phrase "baring a direct photo match" but I think they might have had a typo and meant "barring". If that is the case then it doesn't seem like there is a photo match as part of the authentication, unless I missed it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

There are +/- 10 pages of MEARS authentication online with the ruth glove. There are some pages of PSA/DNA authentication too. I read them but didn't see either say they photo-matched it. MEARS said they didn't examine it in person but used hi res photos. On the other hand PSA/DNA used the phrase "baring a direct photo match" but I think they might have had a typo and meant "barring". If that is the case then it doesn't seem like there is a photo match as part of the authentication, unless I missed it.

Then I genuinely don't understand, what is the significance of the photo, if any?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Then I genuinely don't understand, what is the significance of the photo, if any?

To show it looks like the one being auctioned?

A very advanced memorabilia collector friend of mine collects this kind of stuff. He always judges things but how big of a leap of faith there is for something to be what it is purported to be. On this glove each collector has to make their own decision. It comes with COA letters from 2 of the biggest hobby authenticators of memorabilia.

[Dave Grob]

I have been asked about this glove. I was not involved the MEARS work, but as I read through the work provided, it appears that only two statements were made in the MEARS effort:

1. That it is a catchers mitt as opposed to a first base mitt.
2. The glove being auctioned is the same one that was on display at the Babe Ruth Museum.

Dave Grob

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

To show it looks like the one being auctioned?

A very advanced memorabilia collector friend of mine collects this kind of stuff. He always judges things but how big of a leap of faith there is for something to be what it is purported to be. On this glove each collector has to make their own decision. It comes with COA letters from 2 of the biggest hobby authenticators of memorabilia.

I get that it's an authentic period catcher's glove according to PSA and MEARS, but is it claimed to be the glove in the photo or not?

[uniship]

is there any history to the glove besides fact it was in the museum? who donated it? How did they acquire it? etc.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Dave Grob

I have been asked about this glove. I was not involved the MEARS work, but as I read through the work provided, it appears that only two statements were made in the MEARS effort:

1. That it is a catchers mitt as opposed to a first base mitt.
2. The glove being auctioned is the same one that was on display at the Babe Ruth Museum.

Dave Grob

So MEARS has not authenticated this glove as THE glove used by Babe Ruth in high school?

[midmo]

One of the documents says, "It was determined that the glove was produced circa 1910 and matched what Babe Ruth used while at St. Mary's based on team photographs showing Ruth wearing catcher's gear."

I guess they're not claiming it to be the same glove in the photos. They're just saying the photos prove he wore catcher's gear during that time.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by midmo

One of the documents says, "It was determined that the glove was produced circa 1910 and matched what Babe Ruth used while at St. Mary's based on team photographs showing Ruth wearing catcher's gear."

I guess they're not claiming it to be the same glove in the photos. They're just saying the photos prove he wore catcher's gear during that time.

Thanks for clarifying. So what the authenticators are saying is that the glove's physical characteristics are consistent with the family's claim but they aren't linking it to Ruth specifically. So ultimately this rests on the family's story. IF I am getting this right.

[slidekellyslide]

IN MY OPINION (<---see that lawyers) you have to be pretty damn stupid to buy this glove.

[sbfinley]

It's an old glove. A glove that someone will spend a fortune on regardless of the opinions on this message board. Wish someone would have realized before looking like an asshat.

[ullmandds]

WOW! It is my opinion that this mitt/glove is worth somewhere between 30-$60 us dollars.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by midmo

One of the documents says, "It was determined that the glove was produced circa 1910 and matched what Babe Ruth used while at St. Mary's based on team photographs showing Ruth wearing catcher's gear."

I guess they're not claiming it to be the same glove in the photos. They're just saying the photos prove he wore catcher's gear during that time.

I went back and read the item description in the auction. It could be read to imply that this is THE mitt in the photo, at least as I am reading it.

For one thing, this language -- "THE one" -- implies he only used one during his time there. "Incredibly, this surviving Babe Ruth used glove is the one used by the Babe during his formative years behind the walls of St. Mary's Industrial School for Boys." If he only used one, it must be the one in the photo.

And this connecting the mitt to the one the family says was given to the drug store clerk: "Players like Ruth were expected to purchase their own bats and gloves and it's likely the Babe took along his old catcher's mitt just in case it was needed."

So even if the authenticators are not purporting to photo match the glove, and on further reflection the language you quoted does seem a bit ambiguous in that regard ("MATCHED what Babe Ruth used ... based on team photographs"), it does sound to me like the AH is claiming it is the one in the photo -- unless I am misreading the description.

[slidekellyslide]

Yeah, Babe Ruth signed with Jack Dunn to be a left handed catcher. And I'm sure he took the glove with him because Baltimore couldn't afford to buy Ruth a left handed glove. LOL

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Yeah, Babe Ruth signed with Jack Dunn to be a left handed catcher. And I'm sure he took the glove with him because Baltimore couldn't afford to buy Ruth a left handed glove. LOL

I've been saying just that all along, Dan.

The whole thing reminds me of a scene in "The In-Laws." The tin-pot dictator is showing Peter Falk and Alan Arkin a painting of a tiger on black velvet. "I pay feeefty thousand dollars for thees one." As soon as he's out of earshot, quoth Arkin, "What a schmuck."