Just got this in today. Something I've wanted for a while and was very pleased with the price.

nice piece, but it looks faded. where was it purchased.

I just couldn't pass this one up...
 

That Denkert Mitt is pristine.... makes you wonder how it withstood all those years, untouched by time.

Here's one that I picked up in Mears... not Mint like Jimmy's, but still in great shape considering its age. It's a turn of the century Buckskin Workman's glove. Rare to find these still in tact, without the asbestos lining chewed to shreds (or missing completely...)

Show me yours and I'll show you mine.
 

Absolutely thrilled to pick this up! I've always wanted a photo box! Great gloves guys!

The silk itself is a little faded. I figure its to be expected after some 120-130 years. But the mat is in really nice shape and still has the original advertisement on the back.
And it came off ebay.

Love that Stevengraph, Brock. It looks much better than it appeared in its online depiction...in fact, I can say with, ehem, great authority that the underbidder would have cost you even more money if he knew it was so nice. True, it's a bit faded and not perfect, but these are quite hard to come by. Nice pickup.

It's a nice looking glove, but a full-web about 10-15 years past turn of the century, and definitely not a workman's glove (who's time of production was long over by the time the turn of the century came along). I hate the semantic games sellers and auction houses play in descriptions. The definition of "turn of the century" is open ended, but a decade after, to me, is not 1900. More importantly, "workman's style" is NOT a workman's glove. Workman's gloves do not have webbings of any kind. MEARS' photo, it appears, tried to hide the fact that there is a full web on this glove. I truly hope you noticed this and weren't fooled by the camera angle.

The other misrepresentation that's too prevalent in glove descriptions (though not in this case) is calling any crescent glove a workman's. Workman's gloves do not have crescents, they predated them. The chronology of glove production through the early part of the century is:

Fingerless
Workman's (no web and no crescent)
Webless Crescent
Crescent with a Web
Full Web (no crescent)
One Inch Web

Even this outline could be further defined. Webless crescents are perfect examples. Earlier specimens are narrower and taller compared to squatter, shorter models that followed.

In any event, be careful with auction descriptions as they don't always correctly represent the the item. The MEARS write-up was not untruthful, but semantics were played with to make the glove appear more desirable than it truly is by loosely throwing terms around.

If that were a true workman's glove, given it's condition and having a patch (the earliest manufacturer's patch on a glove appeared on webless crescents), it would have been a steel 10x higher than its hammer price. It likely would have approached five figures.

Well, I suppose Bushing and Kinunen should have known better than to portray it that way. Still, I like the glove for what I paid. I switched over to that one after Ricky outbid me on the Hornsby w/Box...

My finger was on the key to bid again on the Hornsby, but I switched to this one, and refrained. Even if it's not a workman's glove, its a nice full-web from a rare manufacturer.

Ricky... please tell me you would have gone another increment higher on Hornsby, so I don't have to see that damned thing in my sleep tonight! I thought it was a great piece for that money...

Jerry you are right on about the workmen's glove. Glad you are happy with it Mark. It is a nice white full web. Unique patch. Is it Canadian? Nice look! Oh and to put your mind at ease, I had that one max'd a lot higher! ;)

Like I said, it's a nice glove and a really cool Canadian patch, just that the description implied something that it wasn't. I'm glad that it didn't skyrocket to a workman's price, that would have been criminal.

Seems that there are two types of sellers that use the term "workman's glove" loosely... those that don't know better and those that try to take advantage of an unsuspected buyer. Unfortunately, both occur too often. The more one can educate oneself about different intricacies of these old pieces of leather, the better. Forums like this definitely help.

I absolutely agree with Mr Mitt that the word " workman's style" is used way too often to try and entice a much higher sale price on a piece of leather. I have to admit that the first time I stumbled across that auction, I immediately put it on my watch list. But upon viewing the pictures more closely, I recognized the glove as a lower tiered full web. It does not even have a workman's look to it. Don't get me wrong on this Perezfan, it is a very nice example with a nice patch. But it does lack some of the qualities of a top of the line glove. That being said, all that that matters is that you're happy with your purchase.;)

Ricky, that's a great pickup. Nice box and glove!!

Well I'm getting a lot less happy as this thread evolves. I have now gone from "happy" to "indifferent". But that's all right... as Mr. Mitt said, at least it didn't escalate to a "workman's price".

For under $300 (with the juice) I don't think it was a horrible purchase. I have had trouble finding gloves of this vintage without ink, chafing, holes, tears, seam splits, missing tags, detached webs, broken laces, torn lining and/or other flaws... all of which this one seems free of.

I just hope there are no more "surprises" when this one arrives, and that they didn't gloss over any condition issues. One would hope not, from an outfit like Mears. With regards to Ebay, I pass on most of these gloves, as the sellers' descriptions never seem to mention any flaws. The photos never quite reveal them either. Hope this time is different, as the misleading description was troubling enough...

Mark, the size might be a surprise to you as well. This glove has floated from dealer to dealer at the last couple Nationals. It is very small. The leather and tagging are nice but it is very tiny. Don't be shocked when you take it out of the box.

Thanks Brett... that's enough "stuff" now, that I think I'll give Troy a call on Monday ("indifferent" has now turned to "upset").

Please be sure to say hi to your Dad for me, and let him know that a couple more Bats are soon coming his way...

Sorry Mark. I just read all the posts and they are absolutely right. This is a little glove from the teens. Cool tag though but it looks small like Brett says. The number one glove description violation is overuse of the term "workman". Once again, a workman glove has no web and no crescent padded heel. There are no exceptions to this rule and any time you see "workman style" or "workman type", run like hell. A true workman would look ever so primitive and there is not a true workman's glove known with a manufacturer's tag on it. I wish you luck in your resolution.

I got the Gordon in that auction. Now that I got both the Red and Green Gordon boxes, I can permanently check Gordon off the list. This will be my 43rd Gordon over the years. I'm done.

JD
www.baseballglovecollector.com

July 17th, 1941 "All good things must end"
 

The Yankee Clipper's streak comes to a halt at 56.

Extremely scarce vintage original TYPE I photograph.

Attachment 6534

Picked up a couple more jerseys. A 79 Orioles and a 73-75 Wichita Aeros jersey. I promise my next pick-up will be prewar. :)

Clint

Picked up a cool colorized 8x10 photo of Husker slugger Ed Kotab...on the reverse is a cutout from the Lincoln newspaper of a drawing of the same photo.

Dan, that's a great photo. Colorized photos from that era must be fairly rare. I wonder if they made them for the whole team?

Clint

I sure haven't seen very many colorized photos from that era. I think this must have originated from Kotab's estate at some point (found it on ebay from a Kansas seller)..About 6 months ago I lost out on a charm from his conference champion team.

Just came in the mail. 1921-25 Chas. Hollocher mini bat.

Not in the greatest shape, but it's my first flannel sample catalogue

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2512/...6a9c6362_o.jpg

Uniform - ID/Age help?
 

I picked this uniform and cap up last weekend at a flea market. The cap is labeled inside, came from the Princeton University Store. It seems to me too small to fit on a adult man's head, however the uniform is large boy/man sized so I am not sure. There are no labels in the uniform, it appears to be hand sewn and made of what reminds me of old matress material. Notice the Heart that forms the cross of the "A" on the shirt..maybe the Angels?
Sorry the pic are not better. Thanks Greg