Topps 2021 Josh Gibson Bat Relic

[MCyganik]

Most importantly on the way they word these cards these days, who is to say the bat belonged to Gibson? Just because his picture is on the card doesn’t mean the bat piece belonged to him.

I could get a $50 bat from a 2021 player, have MLB authenticate it as “game used” for legality purposes, cut it up and put slices on a card featuring Jim Creighton and note that the “relic” is “game used” (it is) but not from any specific game, event or season. Not my fault people insinuate it might be Creighton’s, although since he’s been dead 160 years it might arouse some suspicion. A player like Gibson is juuuuuust plausible enough for most people to assume its good. Panini borders that line all the time with bats from very old HOFers.

At least for a few years in the early 2000s Donruss and Fleer would show you the actual memorabilia being cut up on the back of the card. As tragic as that was, you could at least say they had an item in their possession at one time vs the complete subterfuge that goes on today, even if some/most of it is legit.

[steve B]

It's even easier to just go to a decent lumberyard and buy a hunk of Ash. That way it's easier to cut up.

[Exhibitman]

This disclaimer stuff has ruined the concept. I pulled a relic card from the Heritage case I busted last year and was very disappointed with that disclaimer. The last GU relic card I bought is a Hank Aaron bat card from 2001 that specifically warrants it is from a bat "...used by Hank Aaron in an official...game". If they're not going to be that specific, don't bother. Just don't.