I'm not saying it is or it isn't, but to me the glove offered looks more like that pictured in the Ruth photos (particularly the 62 topps) than the example provided as a true era catchers mitt. Just because it isn't a catchers mitt doesn't mean it wasn't used by an orphan at an industrial school near the turn of the century. He wasn't exactly playing at the IMG academy. Also, the "dimple" someone alluded to as not being evident can actually be seen (IMO) in the auction photos. As an aside, someone mentioned the lengths that an auction house will go to prove a story or item for their own good. In my experience, the sentiment is just as strong on the other side of the fence as there are some who will move heaven and earth to discredit an auction house or authenticator just because of their distrust for the particular system. I don't collect this particular memorabilia and I'm definitely not an expert, but it's plausible as authentic. Just my two cents.
__________________
Always looking for rare Tommy Bridges items.
|