The SCDA trip

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

This is not meant as a swipe against anyone one particular, but many people in the hobby and elsewhere like to pick a side first and worry about the facts second ... Or not worry about the facts at all.

The other thing I once learned from a thread on a subject I am knowledgeable about (authenticity of photographs), having knowledge about the subject isn't a requirement for some to argue on a chat board.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

"Your take that you won't go and listen to the evidence because you can't get a tour of the Mastro facility is laughable. You are going to the National and won't take 15 minutes to hear there spiel there. I don't get it. I guess my feeble brain is about to explode."

As I've explained earlier in this thread, I think the issue of the streak bat is best left up to the Planich litigation to decide on. I don't know if Bushing's authentication was accurate or not, and I don't believe that hearing a biased, one-sided orchestrated presentation will help me make up my mind.

The Planich litigation, OTOH, will offer depositions and testimony under oath, with questions coming from informed adverse counsel. Same goes for the evidentiary exhibits which will be forcefully obtained (and not subject to SCDA's picking and choosing) and critically examined.

Once those facts are brought to light, then I think we (including Jay, Lee and dan) can all make more informed decisions about the streak bat (and Bushing's overall authentication techniques).

The only other matter is the undisclosed conflict of interest issue. I have exchanged posts here with Troy, as well as private e-mail exchanges on the topic. He has his opinion on things, and I have mine. I have offered suggestions as to what I think will satisfy ethical obligations as well as their own financial concerns. Whether they choose to incorporate those suggestions are up to them.

Otherwise, there's no more point in him trying to persuade me of anything or vice versa. Our minds are made up.

So, what's left to say to them or them to me?

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

PS: Of course, I'll stop "bashing" Lee, Dan and Jay. You all seem like good guys with good intentions. Whatever the outcome, we are all (I think) appreciative of you taking your personal time and trying to enhance our knowledge of the subject. Seriously.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Look, I emailed Lee before he went...and believe me the guy was foaming at the mouth as I was about this issue. These guys are passionate about the hobby/obsession we have and are also possessive and protective over it. So, I'm willing to certainly give their opinions some serious weight (unless we can prove they actually visited the Mastro office in Stepford, Ct.).

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Aaron, I didn't think you were ill-intentioned and I tend to agree with your take on the bat--and 100 percent agree that Bushing is a crock re the conflict issue. I just think that we are all maddogs when it comes to this stuff and we should use our collective energies as, well, collective energy.

[Archive]

Posted By: It Must Be the Iola Water

Jay:

"Joe, thank you for coming down from your high and mighty place. I knew you were sitting next to Aaron, in your comfortable win-win loungers. You say I am unqualified? Do you know what my experience is with game used bats? I'll let you answer this and prove your ignorance on this one."
*
*
No Jay, I really don't know your used bats qualifications.
Here's your chance to tell the whole board about them.
What are they?
-----------------------------------

Lee Behrin;

"Sweet now you say that Robert Plantich and Burdick are in the same league give me a break."
*
*
Also predictably, it went over Lee's head.
Lee, aren't you the avid tobacco collector that just a few months ago found out about the Burdick collection, and Jefferson Burdick?

It's gotta be the water.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

I don't really feel I have to explain why I went, but I will in the interest of the board (or the bored). When Robert Plancich first came to the board and reported on this bat it sparked an interest in me and I decided to undertake some research on the matter. I have a fairly extensive baseball library and came up with some facts on the streak and DiMaggio that I sent to Robert. He was very appreciative and I have had discourse with him off of this board regarding this bat. Some of the research I did was new to Robert and some of my questions at the meeting were based on this research. I came away from the meeting not 100% convinced of this being a streak bat, but I think that the odds are very favorable that this IS bat number 4. I discussed this with Robert this morning on the phone and this story is not over. I look forward to this going through litigation as I think Aaron is correct that the only appropriate forum for this to be settled is in a court of law. So you could say that I went for strictly selfish reasons to satisfy my curiosity on the matter, but I also hope to help this hobby down a more straight forward path.

Dan

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Aaron, you berate us for being shills for SCDA and Mastro, yet you are no better. You bought Robert Plnaich's party line, hook line and sinker and no one had a clue who he really is or what is cedentials are. Who is the bigger fool? The fool, or the fool that follows him?

Planich was a nobody before he posted here, and even I bought into everything he said. Now that I have seen both sides of the story, I have opinion of the bat based firmly on facts and data. I cannot tell you what to believe, you ahve make that decision yourself, but it boils down to believing someone who has no history and no background or taking the word of 3 collectors, one of which (myself) has experience with buying and selling game used bats.

You are as much a shill for Planich as you think we are shills for SCDA and Mastro.

You also state you want to wait for the unbaised court trial to settle whether the bat is legit or not. What color is the sky where you are from? There is no such thing as an unbiased trial. Each side is presenting biased information. Do you think OJ would have gotten off if his case was truly unbiased?

Joe, here's my bat credentials: I learned everything I know a lot I've forgotten from Mike Montbriand. On the way to the MAstro offices, Troy asked if any of had experience with game used bats. I mentioned this to him, and also to Bushing when we got to the offices. If there intent was to bamboozle us, which I doubt, they knew up front that I learned about bats from the best and they even acknowledged that. So I was not going to be easily convinced about anything with the knowledge I have.

At this point, I stepping away from the thread unless there are some relavent questioned asked by people other than Joe or Aaron.

Jay



I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

There are two aspects of this story that continue to cause me some doubts, although there may well be good answers. First, I really cannot understand why Mr. Bushing would have "flipped" the bat so quickly the first time if he was aware based on the relevant bat records that there was a reasonable chance the bat was a "streak" bat. Why only do the research when the bat fortuitously was returned. Second, I really cannot understand why Mr. Henrich, knowing all those years that he had left a "streak" bat at his mother's or whoever's house, would not have made an effort to retrieve it and capitalize on the memorabilia craze which surely he was aware of.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

"Aaron, you berate us for being shills for SCDA and Mastro, yet you are no better. You bought Robert Plnaich's party line, hook line and sinker and no one had a clue who he really is or what is cedentials are. Who is the bigger fool? The fool, or the fool that follows him?"

Jay, no offense, but what are you talking about?

I already posted (several times) that I don't know if Planich's claims about the streak bat are right or wrong and that I think it's best for the matter to be handled in court where neither party has an advantage and a neutral party presides.

Actually, I think Planich sounds like an obsessive crank, and if I were Bushing I probably would have ignored his e-mails, too. But that doesn't make him right or wrong.

I think your trip was a waste of time because it was a biased one-sided unchallenged presentation--a lame PR stunt. It goes without saying, I would have dismissed a similar "demontsration" from Planich.

But Plnich did bring to light the subject of undisclosed conflict of interest which has turned out to be correct. For that I'm grateful, and hopefully it will lead to some change in the hobby.

[Archive]

Posted By: Clarity In Iola

"I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks."
*
*
The clarity is possibly due to the fact that they're not his thoughts or words.

I say more to the signature, and less to his incoherent thought patterns.
-------------
sabrjay Bahren:

"Joe, here's my bat credentials: I learned everything I know a lot I've forgotten from Mike Montbriand. On the way to the MAstro offices, Troy asked if any of had experience with game used bats. I mentioned this to him, and also to Bushing when we got to the offices. If there intent was to bamboozle us, which I doubt, they knew up front that I learned about bats from the best and they even acknowledged that. So I was not going to be easily convinced about anything with the knowledge I have."
*
*
Wow, I'm impressed.
I've learned everything that I need to know about the business world by watching Donald Trumps "Apprentice."

Innocent brilliant and worldly child.
If I wanted to win a Jay type over, I would do exactly what they did.
Troy, Bushing, and the SCDA crew played their cards well.

Their mission:
1. Make the boys feel welcomed at the O.K.Corral.
2. Pump up their ego's, and tell them how intellegent they are.
3. Win them over, win them over.
4. Let them talk about anything, we already have their playbook and game plan from their previous thread.
5. Stay away from the Conflict of Interest thing.
6. Not to worry, we'll take care of Jay's video recording illusions.
7. Treat our well meaning pawns with respect - buy them a soda.
8. Always remember, they come here to bury Caesar, and not to praise him.
9. Our mission here at the O.K. Corral, is to turn that around.
10. Oh yes, one more thing, watch out for this Dan Bretta guy -- he has a legitimate OPEN mind, as for the other two -- just flatter them.

11. Of utmost importance -- Don't forget to for the SCD pictures.

True, the brothers Bayrin sound alike, but I must consider that it might not be the Iola water.

[Archive]

Posted By: mcavoy

What were the other bats Bushing bought from the Heinrich family? What are the dates estimated for those bats?

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

Dave made no mention to what the other bats were. But I believe he said there were 6 very dirty bats in the lot.

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

they would have all been pre-Spetember 1941 since Henrich moved out in August.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

These are the other bats according to Troy fomr SCDA:

Other bats were Tommy Henrich block letter rookie bat, 2 Tommy Henrich signature model 35 1/2 stamped on knob, Babe Herman store model bat, Red Ruffing, and one other major league bat that Dave couldn't remember, common major league stars. All pre 1941.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric

This is a comment I just posted over on the game used forum board, but I'd like to throw it out to you folks as well.

Jay-
Thanks for your report.

I am confused by something you mentioned. You wrote,

"As to Ichiro bat, Bushing said this came from agent of Ichiro and apprently were mislead about the bat."

I think I need more explanation on this. I'm sorry, but it's not being too harsh by saying if an authenticator is to sign a letter on something they have to do their own homework before issuing that letter. Even if somehing comes directly from a player, it is the authenticator's obligation to examine it and compare to archival photos. We have seen instances where players ahve sold the same event used item TWICE. So a good source may not always be a good source. If it's what it sounds like, SCDA too Ichiro's agent's word on the bat and issued a letter? Please clarify

Thanks
Eric
moderator Game Used Forum
http://www.network54.com/Index/33448

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

It sure seemed a sore subject with them when I brought it up. I don't think they wanted to talk about it, but it sounds like they got hoodwinked by Ichiro's agent. I then asked them how they could give an A-10 to a bat on word alone and they said they didn't even have the A1-A10 scale when that happened. I believe it was reported in this forum that they had given that bat an A-10.

Other than the DiMaggio bat, we discussed briefly the Cobb Decal bat, Seaver Glove, and The Ichiro bat. The only one they copped to making a mistake on was the Ichiro bat. I did ask questions about the Ichiro and Cobb bat, but I didn't feel like I knew enough about those items to delve into anything deeper than we did, and I was mainly interested in the DiMaggio bat.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

In the authentication of rare photographs, provenance is considered evidence (ala, it came from a magazine's editor, from the estate, etc), often imporant evidence. But it is only one piece in the authentication puzzle, along with physical examination of the photo, etc. It is also known that not all 'provenance' is reliable or sometimes the reliable provenance is used to make hasty conclusions (Someone being given a Mike Schimdt photo from Mike Schmidt and incorrectly assuming the photo is an original. Schmidt can own reprints of himself just like anyone else). For every forged Babe Ruth baseball there is a made up story where it came from. In some cases, physical examination of a photo will prove the provenance bogus. In many cases, physical examination of the photo and the reliable provenance will support each other-- which is the best.

There was an interesting case where on eBay where the style of photo itself strongly supported the seller's big claim of famous ownership. There was an 1880s Cincinnati Reds team photo that the seller claimed actually personally belonged to star pitcher Tony Mullane. The seller was no expert on photos, and may have admited as such in the sale description. The photo was an unusually large Joseph Hall cabinet-style photo of the Reds. The photo was like 3 times bigger than the regular cabinets. Back in the old days, these large size photos were difficult and expensive to make. They were ordinarilly made only for VIPs, like the team manager or star players or to be displayed in the team clubhouse or town hall. In short, the mere size of the photo was good evidence that the photo did indeed belong to Mullane.

A common worry of collectors of expensive modern photos by famous photographers like Phillipe Halsman or Annie Lebovitz is whether or not the photo is legitimate. Photos not made by or with the authorization of the copyrights owner (photographer, magazine that hired the photograher, etc)are worthless and are, infact, often illegal to sell. Besides, a collector doesn't want to spend $1,000 on David Baily photo that someone eBay seller made 10,000 copies of in his Milwaukee basement. Provenance will help support the legitimacy or 'officialness' of the photo. If a collector knows the photo came from a magazine editor or the photographer's estate or the auction of a newspaper's archives, he can be confident that the photo is legitimate. Stamping on a photo also helps prove the legitmacy. The stamp or paper tag of the photographer, news service or Sports Illustrated shows that the photo was made with propor authorization, and the collector should feel comfortable buying.

As far as the Ichiro bat goes, I think the folks who examined the bat and MastroNet made a dumb error, but we all make dumb errors and it's no longer a big deal for me.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

The DiMaggio bat has a lot going for it.
1. It can be only 1 of 22 bats made by H&B.
2. It shows game use and was repaired. I'm not sure it would have been worth Henrich's time to get repaired if it were not a "special" bat.
3. You have the word of Henrich that it was a streak bat.
4. Finding the bat in Henrich's mother's house makes the probability that he put it there before he got married believable. It also makes it more believable that this bat came from the 7-1-41 bat order since Henrich got married in July of 41 and moved out of his mother's house at that time.

In order for you to say it is not a streak bat you have to be prepared to call Tommy Henrich a liar. I am not prepared to do that.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred

The Tommy H connection is interesting. If I recall there was a lot of interest in having the "chosen people" watch the entire taped interview to see if TH was being "lead" or "coached" into a response. Just because the entire tape wasn't presented doesn't mean that there was any impropriety it just means that it wasn't shown. If the tape is shown sometime in the future and it doesn't show TH being "lead" or "coached" then the tape would be called suspicious because it would lead some people to believe that the tape had been edited.

This incident will never be free of suspicion unless the bat has some very distinguishing characteristics that show up on a photograph of Joe D holding this exact bat during the streak. Even then the picture would only show Joe D holding the bat and not using it during the streak....

I'm sure everyone has figured this out already... an A10 rating is out the door.

[Archive]

Posted By: Krystal Klear

mcavoy
(Login m-mac) other bats February 25 2005, 11:26 AM

What were the other bats Bushing bought from the Heinrich family? What are the dates estimated for those bats?
**********************

Lee Behrens
(Login bowlingshoeguy) Re: The SCDA trip February 25 2005, 12:14 PM

Dave made no mention to what the other bats were. But I believe he said there were 6 very dirty bats in the lot.

Lee
**********************

jay behrens
(Login sabrjay) Re: The SCDA trip February 25 2005, 12:17 PM

they would have all been pre-Spetember 1941 since Henrich moved out in August.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
**********************

jay behrens
(Login sabrjay) Re: The SCDA trip February 25 2005, 4:11 PM

These are the other bats according to Troy fomr SCDA:

Other bats were Tommy Henrich block letter rookie bat, 2 Tommy Henrich signature model 35 1/2 stamped on knob, Babe Herman store model bat, Red Ruffing, and one other major league bat that Dave couldn't remember, common major league stars. All pre 1941.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
*********************
*
*
*
Possible clarification for the above could be:

1. Lee was in another room?

2. Troy is reading this, and he's helping out with some, but not all of the blanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd (nolemmings0

Never mind