Braves want Heritage to pull Hank Aaron items from auction
 

Oh, that's awesome. Good stuff, can't wait to see how it plays out.

I mean a lot of the way these companies "photo match" or "authenticate" pieces from decades ago, is really grey and sketchy.

Eric

Weird; I would figure the statute of limitations on theft in Georgia would be too long to have any kind of claim to the items, if they were taken 50 years ago and transferred ownership 8 years ago.
Or do the Braves claim they also own (or had in team storage the same bases)?

It wouldn't surprise me if the Baseball Hall of Fame was sent the wrong base either, if the original Braves employee planned to keep them all for himself.

Yup, and it only started very recently and it's been giving me that red flag uneasiness feeling for a bit now.

Used to take a lots of luck and a photographer being in the right place at the right time with a crystal clear photo and the right person having access to that photo, for anything to be convincingly photo-matched.

Now all of a sudden they're matching up equipment to multiple games across large swaths of time...and declaring it pretty definitively.

Sometimes I think they're using the same AI program that JollyRodgersRelics uses to try to convince himself and others that photo of Ernest Borgnine is actually Cap Anson in civvies.

Very interesting:

"The Atlanta Braves remain deeply concerned with Heritage’s lack of diligence and complete failure to authenticate the Disputed Items," the letter said. "We are conducting an investigation into the authenticity of the remaining Disputed Items and into how Heritage and any other party came into possession of them. If any of the Disputed Items are found to have been acquired illegally, they are the rightful property of the Atlanta Braves and should be returned to the Atlanta Braves immediately.

"And if any of the Disputed Items are found to be inauthentic, Heritage’s sale of the fraudulent items would negatively impact the value of the actual items, causing irreparable harm to the Atlanta Braves by potentially diminishing the financial and historic value of the sports memorabilia at issue."

Strong words. Not a good look for Heritage if any of the Braves' claims turn out to be true.

I think Heritage just needs to bite the bullet on this one and take the loss, whatever it may be.

Will do more harm to them if they follow through with the auction.

Not sure they should just hand them over to the Braves either, as they are just a consignee and not the owner of the items in question either. Have the Braves deal directly with the consignor and not Heritage.

Also, if these are actually legit, is it entirely possible, all of these items would have been lost to time if the groundskeeper in question didn't bag up all these items and curate them for the last 50 years?

This is 1974 we're talking about. There was no known collectible market for bases at the time that I'm aware of. Teams weren't pulling every piece of memorabilia they could think of to sell on the secondary market, or even to put it in the stadium museum.

Braves want them NOW...but did they want them in 1974?

Also, Braves don't seem to be sure if they are "real" or "inauthentic"...but they want them "returned" to them either way. Do the Braves claim to have the "real" bases or not?

So many questions.....so much I don't know and never will. :D

and to further complicate matters, Lelands auctioned off what was supposed to be 2nd base from the historic 715 game over 20 years ago:

https://lelands.com/bids/second-base...h-homerun-game

That's wild. They didn't even bother to offer any provenance, the nice decorating job removes all doubt, lol.



.

I have owned precious few game used items. I am very thankful that my area of interest is only in players who were personal friends and other obscure guys that absolutely nobody would waste their time on forging.

There are extremely skilled craftsmen out there for the big boy material, which reminds me, why haven't we heard anything more about Henkel et al?

https://auction.lelands.com/bids/bidplace?itemid=12242


I think that should be the link to the actual listing and realized price.

Jeez, I know that was 22 years ago now, and Lelands is generally reputable...but that's a "Coach's Corner" quality level listing.

The faith based collectibles economy has always been strong. ;)

I think there's a relatively high possibility of that being the case.

Here's the lot of bases in question. Was harder to find then I expected. I haven't a clue if they are legit or not.

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c...iption-071515#

The HOF says they got the base directly from Hank Aaron in 1982. That’s as good a story as any here.

Somebody gave Hank Aaron a base. I doubt he dug it out of the ground himself.

The HOF could very well have the real base...they just as easily could not.

Yeah, I'm cynical. I've seen too many items in museums and personal collections, obtained from the athlete themselves, that don't pass the sniff test.

Nat Fleischer ran The Ring Boxing Museum and had a ton of gloves on display going back to the 1950's and 60's that were given to him by the boxers themselves from various "important" fights. Half of them weren't even the right brand of glove LOL.

I don't think it's any type of purposeful deception from these athletes. This stuff wasn't even worth anything back in the day. I just don't think they were hung up on the accuracy of such things, as we are today. Especially since this has become a "business" as such.

Very interesting.

This reminds me of the mystery of Roberto Clemente’s 3000th hit bat. Here’s an incredibly fascinating piece from ESPN that strongly hints Clemente himself told at least three different people that he was giving them the bat he got his 3,000th hit with:

http://https://www.espn.com/espn/sto...o-clemente-bat

I'm not a legal expert by any stretch, but would someone please explain to me how a groundskeeper could just remove the bases, etc. and keep them as his own? I don't get it - was he stealing the bases? I'm guessing his job description explained what he was responsible for doing, but just taking things home and keeping them sounds illegal to me - but again - I don't know. It's not like the bags were thrown in the garbage and he picked them out of the dumpster while dumpster diving. I think he realized some sort monetary value and basically stole the items from the braves. I kind of base it on this train of thought: "An employee is prohibited from removing any items belonging to the company and taking them home as their possession".

Maybe I'm wrong, but it sounds like they stole the bases from the Braves organization. In this case, possession does not mean ownership.

All that sounds reasonable, though I imagine it could be argued by the descendants of the groundskeeper that disposing of old/used equipment and supplies was part of the description of his job…..and that keeping or donating stuff may actually have been one of the perks of the job.

All that said, a lot must be taken on faith here. Who’s to say these bases weren’t from 1973 or 1975 or an entirely different set of bases from 1974. The provenance in the listing isn’t entirely forthcoming beyond somebody who knew somebody, who was somebody, who wrote something on a box that had some stuff in it.

Is the story real? Maybe. The value I guess is in how many people with deep pockets can you convince of this.

I’ve been increasingly skeptical of any game used items that heritage puts up for auction. For instance, they had a game used Lou Brock hat from the 70s that was very clearly a hat from the early 90s. I reached out to them about it and they apologized and pulled it from the auction. Was amazing that it was even there in the first place. Either very amateurish or with bad intentions…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let’s say something was stolen from a company in 1950. It’s now 2000 and the company has changed ownership 4 times and the item is recovered. Who has a right to the claim? Does it automatically pass to each new owner? What if the items were given away by the first owner but the last owner is now claiming it was stolen?

Don't they have the Fake Ruth Jersey from the much debated Fake Called Shot game too?

Why is no one suing them over that? I'm sure they did their due diligence with a fake photo match too. Only 30M leap of faith. Probably "from the Barry Halper Collection".

S C A M M Y

I will state that all my interactions, albeit limited, with Heritage have been very positive and I consider them to be very reputable.

Recently, there have been some serious issues with the top tier auction houses ranging from the theft at Memory Lane to this with Heritage. Makes me wonder what's going on, and if maybe processes aren't being adhered to as in the past.

It's always, always, always, about money. If anyone states anything different, it's not the truth.

I once bought what was billed as a possible game used ABC Astros batting helmet, no flaps, that is very rare from the early 70s. The photos looked spectacular. Then I received the helmet and could still smell the fresh paint used to create the star logo on the front. Ahh, the smell of a fake.

Don't forget the Boston Garter sh*tshow.

Not sure if you are being facetious, but I do not remember this jersey being part of the Sotheby’s Halper auction.

Aaron
 

I recall the story about what turned out to be Aarons last HR with the Brewers, grounds crew guy grabbed it and refused to give it to team..got fired, Aaron got mad at the dude,...I think it ended up being auctioned and money split ??

Not sure how it does more harm following thru with the auctions especially on the jerseys. No one knows the ownership and what happened on items from 50-70 years ago. So I think the Braves claims are just BS and they want to get the items without spending money to get them back.

But dealing with the bases, they should probably be pulled because now because of the one in the HOF and the other possible lelands one puts the heritage ones into more question.

This should be an easy decision for HA. Pulls the items, return them to the consignor, and tell him they would be happy to rerun them once ownership is cleared up. It makes no sense to waste corporate resources and time fighting a battle with a MLB baseball team. With the provenance of the items now tarnished their realizations will be depressed even if HA was to prevail.

I will make a prediction now that I guarantee will happen at some point, with spectacular ramifications to the GU community.

There shall be a prominent photo match company that will assert a jersey or bat was definitely used at some very historic moment. With such assertion, this item will sell for huge money. However, another very similar item will surface, and a different respected photo match authority will declare this item is, in fact, the real, genuine GU jersey or bat, and not the previously authenticated one.

Much chaos shall ensue.

-Nostradamus

Looking forward to see how this plays out.

If you look at some of the "so-called" photo-matches done today, they are not clear-cut matches. Enlarging images (especially older ones) can distort the actual image, making you having to look hard at it to see if it's an actual photo-match. Many people just accept it today. Hey, I got a letter saying it's a match, so I'm good to go. Not true in many cases. I've been burned a few times myself, and learned my lesson, so always proceed with caution.

That stuff has already happened: https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/mi...-certification
https://petapixel.com/2023/09/06/fak...-jersey-fraud/

Photo-matching can never ever ever ever be used to establish an item is authentic. Photo-matching is what is referred to as a negative test. It can prove what something is not; it cannot establish what something is. If an item does not match, then one can conclusively say it is not real. If an item matches, the most one can say is that it might be real.

In regard to multi-million dollar jerseys, I can assure you that as I write this there are people who are examining every known photograph of a player wearing a particular jersey at a particular time to be certain that their subsequent manufacture of a forgery MADE WITH GENUINE MATERIALS VINTAGE TO THE PERIOD OF ORIGINAL MANUFACTURE matches every discernible feature shown on the photographs. For my dollar, unless the item comes with persuasive provenance it would not satisfy my comfort level to purchase. And by persuasive provenance, I mean more than just a great story of how the item has been in the family for so many years or was obtained by some person who knew the player or worked for the team. For stories such as those, unless they are corroborated by a detective agency, they are worthless. And when have you ever heard of an AH hiring such a detective agency?

We're talking about 7 and 8 figure items here, and if that fact alone doesn't incentivize every known forger extant in the human race, then nothing will.

If an item does match, then one can conclusively say it is real.

Exactly, Corey. Exactly.

This is why I have always been queasy about this end of the hobby. As noted, I do have a handful of game used pieces, but their value is such that nobody would have wasted their time in forging them. They carry more sentimental value to me than a dollar value to the rest of the world.

I've heard many people on this forum and elsewhere who have expressed their uncomfortablilty entering the autograph realm for similar reasons. I understand their hesitation, but after a lifetime of acquisition, study and research, I'm extremely thankful to not share in that trepidation. I would feel the same way about any field in which I hadn't thoroughly attempted to educate myself over an extended period. There are naturally reasons (which we've discussed to death) that people end up getting burned in various collectibles realms due to inadequate knowledge. When starting out, it seems that there may only be one safer path to take vs. many possible missteps. "Safer"--not fail-safe!

I think the Braves and HOF claims are both as dependent on a story as the groundskeeper tale. Because something belongs or belonged to the HOF doesn’t make it what it’s purported to be. Something can only be what it is not what it is said to be. I think it would very difficult to separate fact from fiction in either scenario and as a result all items must be doubted.

General objections to photo-matching aside, would this particular story make anyone here more hesitant about trusting Heritage specifically when it comes to something like bidding on the 1932 Ruth jersey?

Precisely my point. Zero chance it's legit, IMHO. The actual "Called shot" has been discussed and disputed for years and now this.:D:D:D It's just another comedic Scam in a hobby swimming in them.

The biggest question I have about the called shot jersey is how it came to be associated with the called shot. I think it far easier to find things you want to see than it is for clues to make themselves evident. What I mean is, did the original owner of the jersey who reportedly received it from Ruth as a retirement gift ever mention the called shot game? Or did a later owner wonder aloud whether this could be his called shot jersey and that's where the story started?

It certainly seems like the kind of story that would follow an item like this from inception. We see it with items that are bogus all the time. There is some family lore where so and so was with Ruth at this place in this year but the signature is clearly not Ruth's and the story cannot be true either. I would think a true story would be just as ubiquitous for an item with this kind of history.

This hobby has gotten far too complicated for an old geezer like me. To me, the hobby will always be trading those new beautiful '52 Topps cards with my pals under a spreading Oak tree. The time I spent as a retail dealer some 25 years ago seems light years away compared to the present scene. Only the cards have remained the same. Money has corrupted the hobby.

Collecting game used and game worn items is a unique and, I think, wonderful niche of the overall hobby. Based on the info presented in the article, I don’t have an opinion on the accuracy of the auction description and attribution, but I would say that there is a wide range of certainty with respect to the authenticity and attribution of such items. It’s up to the prospective buyers as to whether the information presented, together with any info (such as photos) they can independently find, gives them the degree of certainty they need to spend what it will take to acquire particular items. The concerns involved are obviously similar to those in the hobby’s other niches, card trimming and alterations, autograph forgeries, etc. In other words, you need some experience in a niche in order to set that comfort level scale for yourself in the first place. In the game used niche, some items are more difficult to authenticate than others, and nailing down specific date of use adds another layer of difficulty. The more generic the item, such as older bases, provenance and chain of custody evidence are critical. Here, there are competing claims of provenance. As someone else noted, even players don’t always know the details of what they have in their possession. Interestingly, some players have denied the authenticity of uniform their items being sold by others likely because they resent the big bucks that others are making from their old jerseys and such. As for photo matching, collectors need to visually examine the claims for themselves. Some claimed photo matches are clearer than others, and some items lend themselves to matching better than others. Seeing a bat conclusively photomatched due to wood grain patterns, for example, is very cool. Overall, while absolute certainty in game used collecting is rare, it’s a rewarding part of the hobby for those willing to put in the time to learn. And the point is that the process of learning is fun.

+1 💯

Back in the box it goes.


https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...812343ac8e.jpg

There is an interview with Andy Moog, goalie in the 80s and 90s, with Edmonton and Boston and Dallas. He has some of the most iconic hockey masks ever. They asked him in his interview if he still had any masks from his career. He said he didn't have any 80s masks or masks with the Bruins. His first famous mask was painted over for Olympics in the 1980s. Other masks were painted over as well if they were still in good condition for the next season. He said nobody cared what happened to them, and neither did he. And this was late 80s and early 90s when there was definitely a market for game used equipment!

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Well stated!

Some guy was writing the same thing 50 years ago.

+1 💯

One of my odd sports collectibles is bicycles built for or used by racers or teams mostly the crazy aero stuff from the 1980's up to just before 2000 when they were gradually made illegal for competition.

The image most people have is the riders especially on the national team being given nearly perfect bikes and other equipment.
After the first use, many were repainted, some more than once. And not a high quality repaint either. The brand labels were often just vinyl stickers, and the rebranding was simply spray can paint over the old stickers and new stickers added. The sponsor only cared if it was legible in photos or from a few yards away.

One of the reasons I sort of flinch when someone gets a bike with a number hanger but a paint job from a different manufacturer and wants to "restore" it.

The "helmets" are just fiberglass head fairings with a few bits of foam glued in. for one year that was done with some sort of contact cement that's still sticky. I talked to someone who knew a few of the racers, and mentioned that I thought the foam was badly replaced on ones I have. Nope, the athletes hated how the glue never totally dried and stuck to their hair. Later ones used a different glue.

Heritage just needs to end the auction, and eat whatever profit is lost. Reputation means everything in this hobby, now more than ever, and the whiff of fraud could be ruinous for an auction house.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. They did what you wanted! Amazing.

Now some schmuck owes them 24 Big Ones though.

As sorry as I am to say it, this isn't even remotely true.

I am confused. Didn't all of the Aaron/Braves items sell?
https://www.ajc.com/sports/atlanta-b...NRO5E64ZAR65E/

· 1954 Hank Aaron game worn and signed Milwaukee Braves rookie jersey. Sold for $2.1 million.

1974 Hank Aaron game worn Atlanta Braves jersey. Sold for $138,000.

· 1974 Hank Aaron game worn Atlanta Braves cap. Sold for $9,000.

· 1948 Jim Prendergast game worn Boston Braves satin uniform. Auction extended 14 days.

· 1957 Bob Buhl game worn Milwaukee Braves uniform. Sold for $4,320.

· 1958 Joe Adcock game worn Milwaukee Braves jersey. Sold for $8,400.

· 1958 Del Crandall Gold Glove Award. Sold for $7,200.