ONL Baseball on Ebay
 

Why are 2 people duke-in' it out for this?....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEWAX:IT

price seems already high and still 4 days to go.

I believe that's a Heydler ball dating back to around 1918. The only reason I say that is because I believe that the Heydler era was the only one where the ball said Cork and Center on the sides of official. I could be wrong about that though.

Something seems fishy about the bidding patterns though. Nobody bids like that with 4 days remaining.

I spoke with the seller a few days ago...He thought it was a 1909 ball because of the patent date stated on it. But its not, as I explained to him.
Its either a 1917 Tener ball but more likely a 1920 Heydler. 1918-19 didnt have " Cork & Center" on either side of " Official".
The two people bidding obviously havent done their homework, and are bidding on a ball worth about $400-$500. They likely think its a 1909 baseball...

Very good. I didn't know the Tener ball had it as well, and wasn't 100% sure whether or not all Heydler balls had it.. We all learn something new everyday, and that's why we're here. .

In saying that...I have spent $300-$400 over actual value on a ball before because it helped in my collection. I saw it fit to spend the extra cash for a ball & box that I needed/wanted. The bidders could also be in the same boat.

I could understand that happening on the last day, maybe day and a half. But two bidders going at it with 4 days left though, that still doesn't make any sense to me.

Agreed...Its senseless...

I don't know the bidders, obviously, but maybe they have another motive. ??

Perhaps it will re-enter the hobby as a 1919 signed Black Sox ball

Well, if they consign it to CC they'll be losing money at this point. :D

Maybe it will resurface with an Ed Delehanty (that spelling already has gotten two COA's :confused::confused:) signature.

I'd vote for the ball reappearing as a single signed Ruth ball.


http://www.amazon.com/b?%5Fencoding=...&creative=9325

That ball is not a Heydler baseball, it is definitely a 1917/1918 John K. Tener ball. The price they are driving it up to is not too far off from what it is worth, with the side facsimile stamp it would go for probably 1K.

Regardless of which ball it is, the point still remains that there were 4 days left in the auction when the nutty bidding was pointed out. These are either two shills, two idiots, or one of each.. I could understand if there were maybe 6 or 7 people all throwing in their first bids. I could even understand it if the first bidder put in his top amount and the 2nd guy kept chipping away until he figured out that bidders max. But no two people in their right minds, would legitimately duke it out like that by trading high bids numerous times with 4 days remaining.

That seems to be the trend lately, I bid on a few balls that were being bid on like crazy the first day of a 7 day auction, couldn't understand it. I looked at the bidders and noted the feedback number, the same guy had bid on all of the baseballs I was going for, from different sellers. So I threw out the Shill bidder assumption and just figured the guy was an idiot who really wanted the ball. He never won though, just drove up the price.

Future 5 original hall of famers signed ball.

And the winner for the worst bidding strategy ever....
 

goes to the Winner: K**P(66).

He could have bid $150 at the very end instead of having a war and he probably still would have won.

Instead he wins it for 813.89.

I hope he's rich.

There's no way that ball is at $150 at the end of the auction, yes $800 was high but you're obviously not understanding the rarity of the ball, Its a 1917 Tener, not a Heydler ball, they only made that style 1 year. You can tell by the bottom logo. If I didn't have one already I'd bid $600-$700 on it at the end. You don't see those very often.

Very true. I just meant the 2 kept bidding against each other, where if the one didnt bid until the end then 1 bid would have done it, but yes, others would have upped it in the mean time. Too bad the Tener stamp doesn't show.

Yes there's no doubt there was some silly bidding going on. But I guess the trend for some of these guys bidding is "I want it, and here's how much I'm going to pay". And they don't care how early that is. I'm doubting there was ever a Tener stamp on the ball, probably a minor league ball.

It's not the best bidding strategy for ebay, but it is a strategy.

The Baseball is a NL Spalding Heydler 1918. Not a member of Worthpoint but I dare to say its true value is $800 + or - a buck.

This is not a Heydler ball, how many times do we need to state that. Its a Tener and you can tell by the lower panel Spalding logo. I guarantee it.

A Heydler Ball isn't impossible...Check out the one here.

http://www.photos.bigleaguebaseballs...r-1918.jpg.php

However, the only difference between the two balls seems to be the "1" and "l" on the top panel. That may be the giveaway to it more than likely being a Tener ball. I don't know for sure though..

I told you the difference is in the bottom logo, IT'S A TENER BALL! That ball you've linked to is a Heydler, look at the stitching in the bottom logo, small tight stitching is Heydler, the larger stitching logo on the TENER makes it A TENER. F.A.C.T.

Not a fact. You even said it yourself earlier in this thread, w/o a president stamp, could very well be a minor league ball.

Yes FACT. The only difference in the minor league ball would be NOT having the presidential stamp. Its clear as day that the bottom logo is the older style, why is this so hard to believe? Look at the link above, note the small stitching in the bottom logo, then look at the eBay ball and see how large it is, they didn't use that stamp for Heydler. Geez!

Not saying it's a Heydler, I'm saying it could be a minor league president stamp like Barrow or someone else.

I remain firm in my opinion its a NL Spalding Heydler 1918. Novakjr provided a link to Big League Baseballs showing a NL Spalding Heydler 1918 that matches identical to the originally posted ebay picture in every marking with the exception of the No. 1 vs No. l on the top of the baseball. I've not seen a Tener Baseball but show me one that supports that claim and I will gladly stand corrected.

He was right about the stitching on the bottom logo. I hadn't noticed it before.