What you guys think of this item
 

This was on ebay the other day but ended early. Thoughts on whether it's real or not? This would be the 3rd baseball that I know of attributed from 1903 world series.


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...:X:RTQ:US:1123

I'm no expert, but those stitches look red and black to me, not red and blue.

Also, the writing on the ball looks to be in ballpoint pen, which is also suspicious. As in, why would the owner wait 40+ years after the fact to add the narrative on the ball?

Listing and images, in case they disappear:

I was watching as well, but wasn't going to bid. I didn't like it at all. Didn't like the writing on it, meaning didn't look vintage. And no stampings whatsoever. Too many red flags.

There is no way that ball is from 1903, period.

Brandon, am I correct that red and black stitching would be 1911 at the earliest (all other inconsistencies aside)?

1909 would be the first year of alternating red/black stitching. a Pulliam NL ball. But I can tell you judging by the stitch material, size, and color, that ball is most likely 1919 earliest if it is a Spalding model.

I thought it was a later ball also and looked too good for being almost 110 years old.

I don't think so, not that early of a baseball!!

Did they call it the "World Series" in 1903?

No

And Freeman hit no home runs in the 03 series. Dougherty hit two in game two and that was all for Boston for the series. One of those was inside the park. The only other home run was Sebrings inside he park homer in game one.
Phillippe didn't pitch in game two.

So pretty much nothing matches up at all.

Edited to add that Dougherty was he left fielder, so a red sox LF hitting a homer does sort of match. Just the wrong guy hitting it off the wrong pitcher.....

Steve B

No chance that horsehide is too smooth and the stitches too tight/fine. Notice also no view of any markings on the ball.