Is MEARS Really A "Research Center"?

[aeneas01]

or better stated, what constitutes a game used equipment "research center"? i tend to imagine a facility that not only employs experts in the field but also houses tools and equipment not typically owned by john q. collector. perhaps a carbon testing laboratory, infrared reflectography and ultraviolet light exploratory processing capabilities, thermoluminescence dating gear, etc., etc.

overkill? maybe. but what about the ability to at least determine the age of ink, of magic marker, scribbled on a game used piece of equipment, on the inside of helmet for example? shouldn't a game used equipment research center at least be able to determine whether or not "lamonica" was scribbled on the inside of a helmet 40 years ago or 6 months ago by employing some sort of ph or oxidation testing? i would think so.

if a game used equipment research center is nothing more than a handful of passionate collectors that have accumulated photos, reference material and equipment, then i'm not really sure what separates a research center from an active/serious collector(s). i would think a distinct difference between the two should be apparent, no?

at the absolute least, i would think a game used equipment research center would either own or have access to an exhaustive library of photos and film footage and know how to efficiently and effectively reference this material. certainly a library above and beyond what is available to john q. collector. but as far as mears's research center is concerned, i'm not sure this is the case. take the jim brown jersey for example, which mears recently sold at an rea auction and which recently sold at mastro. despite their efforts, mears was unable to locate a single, conclusive image of jim brown actually wearing that particular style of jersey in a game - according to troy kinunen of mears:

Our attempts were inconclusive. There are several clear photos of Jim Brown wearing Durene materials (me: not to be confused with the style of jersey in question). Less than a dozen, but they do exist. It is challenging to find available footage to be used for photo matching. We referenced all of the available images...

contrary to troy's claims, obviously more than "less than a dozen" clear photos of jim brown wearing a durene jersey exist - in fact many more exist. and of course there is obviously no way troy and/or the mears staff could have possibly "referenced all of the available images..." because that would mean a known quantity existed and that troy/mears referenced each and every one of them. there is not a known quantity and, as such, it's pretty safe to assume troy/mears didn't reference all of them.

while i was taking a closer look at the helmets listed at mastro, i promptly came across conclusive film footage of jim brown wearing the "tear away" style of jersey, the style of jersey in question, in a game. an image that apparently eluded mears. how is this possible? i don't operate a research center nor do i have access to an exhaustive photo/film reference library. yet i had no problem locating such an image. hopefully the buyer of this jersey can use the photo(s) and film footage to his advantage when it comes time to sell.

troy went on to state in his article that enough circumstantial evidence existed, even if a conclusive game image could not be found, to assure mears that jim brown wore this particular style of jersey in a game. in this case troy and mears were right. my concern is the same verdict, based on strong circumstantial evidence, could be easily applied to similar situations - yet the verdict would be wrong. herschel walker posing again and again with a rawlings rts helmet comes to mind. so does deacon jones posing again and again with tk helmet fitted with a bd9 facemask. both helmets were used by the teams in question, both helmets were used throughout the league, grainy photos suggesting the possibility exist. should this be considered sufficient proof? is this the best a collector should expect from a research center? i don't think so.

as i've mentioned in other posts, i really like some of the things mears has brought to the table and to be clear i have absolutely no beef with mears. but i also believe their attempt to apply a grading system to game used garments and equipment and their attempt to be known as a research center are nothing more than crude, transparent contrivances designed to exploit the hobby of game used collecting. and i think it reflects poorly on the industry.

here are some photo captures of jim brown stretching at a game - his shoulder pads can clearly be seen through his jersey. further into this film sequence the brightness of brown's white undershirt is conclusively evident through his semi-sheer jersey as he dodges tacklers and stretches for more yardage. these photo captures were taken from nfl films' fields of glory: african american pioneers in pro football. similar footage of brown can be found on other nfl films dvds.


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/jb01-1.jpg

...

[NYRangers]

Slightly off-topic response but I know the Meigray company uses scientific methods in researching jerseys. In addition to advanced photomatching efforts, I have seen them use CSI-type technology to determine if stains on a hockey jersey were blood or, say, ketchup from the concession stand.

[TFig27]

Slightly off-topic response but I know the Meigray company uses scientific methods in researching jerseys. In addition to advanced photomatching efforts, I have seen them use CSI-type technology to determine if stains on a hockey jersey were blood or, say, ketchup from the concession stand.

No offense, but that testing sounds pointless. It sounds like they are doing it just to add some drama to the analysis.

They are not testing who the blood belongs to, or even if it is human blood.

Why can't a player have ketchup on their jersey. It's a well known fact that Babe Ruth's final jersey is covered in mustard stains. :D

[David]

MEARS does research. A lot of their findings are published in their articles section. If they want to call themselves a center, I don't have a problem with that.

I know at universities there are specific criterion that have to be met before you can call your research group a 'center' or 'institute' or whatever-- but there aren't any such rules in the sports hobby. If you are working on your own, you should probably not call yourself a center.

[aeneas01]

MEARS does research. A lot of their findings are published in their articles section. If they want to call themselves a center, I don't have a problem with that.

I know at universities there are specific criterion that have to be met before you can call your research group a 'center' or 'institute' or whatever-- but there aren't any such rules in the sports hobby. If you are working on your own, you should probably not call yourself a center.

i hear what you're saying david - but it seems to me words get thrown around so freely today that their definition gets blurred and their meaning diluted. and more than often the blurring is intentional imo. sure, mears can call themselves anything they want - institute for advanced memorabilia studies, academy of memorabilia forensic sciences, council for game used memoarabilia, forensic research foundation, etc., etc., etc.

but at the end of the day, what is mears? imo mears is simply a group of knowledgeable collectors that try their best to verify the authenticity of game used sports items. and like most others that take a stab at this difficult task, mears is equally susceptible to errors and overlooking available material.

...

[otismalibu]

I saw a Dr. J. shoe incorrectly dated in their current auction. I emailed them and included a link to my collection page, which has a basic shoe timeline. No response, but the next day, the auction description had been changed - still incorrect. I emailed them again (no response) and once again they changed the description. Now it's accurate.

I was tempted to email them a 3rd time, stating that the shoe had also been worn by Warren Coolidge and once belonged to Roman Polanski. Ya know...just for fun.

So now that I'm an unofficial Mears authenticator, it's gonna take $75 before I even look at any Dr. J. memorabilia email questions. Sorry guys, the free ride is over. :D

[costas]

it's a shame some people are so gullible to these scammers

[both-teams-played-hard]

it's a shame some people are so gullible to these scammers
Costas
If you are going to make allegations or question integrity, you need to give facts to support your claim.

[aeneas01]

I saw a Dr. J. shoe incorrectly dated in their current auction. I emailed them and included a link to my collection page, which has a basic shoe timeline. No response, but the next day, the auction description had been changed - still incorrect. I emailed them again (no response) and once again they changed the description. Now it's accurate.

I was tempted to email them a 3rd time, stating that the shoe had also been worn by Warren Coolidge and once belonged to Roman Polanski. Ya know...just for fun.

So now that I'm an unofficial Mears authenticator, it's gonna take $75 before I even look at any Dr. J. memorabilia email questions. Sorry guys, the free ride is over. :D

very interesting otismalibu - i noticed that the dates in the lot description had changed at least a couple of times yet no mention of these modifications was made to the lot description (which seems to be the norm at other auction houses - modification(s) noted in red). so it appears quite clear that mears changed these dates based on your information. so how does that work in terms of the mears loa that is furnished with this shoe? when mears first listed the shoe it was descibed as circa 76 (i believe) - i assume the loa supported this finding? and then when mears changed the date, was this based on a new authentication or did mears simply change the date in the loa? and what about the third time?

i emailed mears late last night about this very thing - i asked about the date changes, why no mention of the changes to the lot description had been made, if mears authenticated this lot each time it was changed and if it was mears's auction policy to change lot descriptions without noting changes were made. by noon today i had not received an answer so i emailed mears again. chris nerat finally responded that my email was received and that it had been forwaded to troy kinunen. i then emailed nerat asking him if he had any idea when troy might be able to answer my questions. nerat then got back to me saying to instead call him and he would address any questions i had.

anyway thanks for posting this oitismalibu - it seems clear that mears used your info. how your information will be reflected, if at all, in their loa is anyone's guess i suppose - i would think mears would at least give you credit for your work, perhaps even in the lot description. i believe mears (or a mears staff member) has even made it pretty clear in the past that they don't offer this sort of info for free. in fact, dave grob (who authors fantastic articles for mears), recently wrote the following at the mears bulletin board:

"I have no interest in working with pick pockets. These are guys who only want, but have little to offer in return. I wrote an article on a possible mid-six figure jersey once, back in the day when all articles were restricted to MEARS Members only. This guy e-mailed me saying he was a serious bidder on the jersey, but did not want to spend $45 for a MEARS Membership and would I please send him my data and research. Serious bidder on a possible mid-six figure jersey and was not willing to spend $45.00? Years ago, I would send folks information all the time in exchange for what they said they had. Most times I never heard back from them, but ended up seeing the information I provided them show up later, but now was being represented as their own work."

...

[otismalibu]

anyway thanks for posting this oitismalibu - it seems clear that mears used your info. how your information will be reflected, if at all, in their loa is anyone's guess i suppose - i would think mears would at least give you credit for your work, perhaps even in the lot description.

I suspect they used the info I gave them, but I can't say for certain.

People like free stuff. Who can blame them.

Years ago a fellow forwarded an email to me he'd received from TNT Network. The 76ers were playing the Hawks and TNT wanted some pics of Dr. J. with the Hawks. The game was on that evening. I emailed him some scans and gave him all the photo credit info I could find in the publications. He said it was too late to get the proper clearance to use those photos. Of course, all the scans I sent him ended up being shown during the telecast.
I watched the credits roll just for fun...didn't see any names I recognized.:)

[aeneas01]

I suspect they used the info I gave them, but I can't say for certain.

People like free stuff. Who can blame them.

Years ago a fellow forwarded an email to me he'd received from TNT Network. The 76ers were playing the Hawks and TNT wanted some pics of Dr. J. with the Hawks. The game was on that evening. I emailed him some scans and gave him all the photo credit info I could find in the publications. He said it was too late to get the proper clearance to use those photos. Of course, all the scans I sent him ended up being shown during the telecast.
I watched the credits roll just for fun...didn't see any names I recognized.:)

has mears responded to any of your emails? even a "yeah, we already knew that" sort of thing? by my count you've sent mears at least three emails? i thought mears was supposed to be the auction house all auction houses aspired to be - transparency, prompt replies to inquiries, etc., etc.

btw i can relate to your tnt story. in my past life i was a bean counter, a number cruncher. i worked with spreadsheets every day of my life for 15+ years - budgets, forecasts, p&l statements, statistical analysis, etc. anyway i've always enjoyed numbers and really used to dig playing around with nfl stats.

in 1999 the rams, my team, lit up the league. towards the end of the '99 season i decided to run some numbers using their stats and their turnovers jumped out at me. the only time they lost was when they were -2 or greater in turnovers. i then proceeded to look at every game played by every team, dating back to 1995, and discovered that turnovers were a huge factor. i compiled this info and emailed it to the sporting news. their head sports writer immediately responded that he was putting a piece together for the playoffs and would like to include my info - he would give me credit. he kept emailing about this and that asking if i could, for example, isolate just the playoff teams. i enjoyed this stuff and said sure. then the playoffs started.

while watching the first playoff game that year, a graphic popped up after one of the teams coughed up the ball: a teams' chance of winning when -1 in turnovers is 30%. as the game progressed the station continued to use these graphics whenever a turnover occurred - a teams' chance of winning when -3 in turnovers is 6%. they used this info throughout the playoffs.

anyway i had provided the sports writer my turnover information in exactly that format - a teams' chance of winning (%) given the amount of +/- turnovers. and the percentages used in the tv graphics were identical to mine. keep in mind that this is long before the talking heads made such a fuss over turnovers, in fact they were rarely mentioned. from then on every time a team coughed the ball up the conversation was all about how important turnovers are.

i emailed the sports writer and told him i saw my work on the tube - i asked him if he had given this info to the networks. didn't hear back. i emailed him a dozen more times and never heard back from him! beautiful.


.....

[both-teams-played-hard]

i emailed the sports writer and told him i saw my work on the tube - i asked him if he had given this info to the networks. didn't hear back. i emailed him a dozen more times and never heard back from him! beautiful.


Welcome to Hollywood!

[aeneas01]

Welcome to Hollywood!

:D :D

i would still like to know why mears hasn't responded to otismalibu's emails. perhaps chris nerat can opine? did mears really use otismalibu's info without so much as a thank you or credit? i would hope not given how stongly mears feels about their hard work being used by others, free of charge.

...

[lund6771]

:D :D

i would still like to know why mears hasn't responded to otismalibu's emails. perhaps chris nerat can opine? did mears really use otismalibu's info without so much as a thank you or credit? i would hope not given how stongly mears feels about their hard work being used by others, free of charge.

...


Maybe they should thrown their own LOA in the trash and have Otismalibu write a LOA.....I mean they can still give a "waranty" on the item, but an LOA after this?

[trsent]

Is anyone ever pleased with anything anymore?

I do not know why MEARS didn't respond to a couple of emails, maybe their emails goes to the guy's spam folder, maybe they just don't like the guy. I don't mind the guy, I'd reply to his emails, but I rather worry about watching this Duckman DVD that I paused to type this response because I do not worry about why I get emails back from some people and not from others because I am not obsessed with attacking people who attempt to run an honest business.

In other news, it is funny how someone called them "scammers" before but they didn't explain what the scam is. Does anyone really believe they intentionally misidentified a pair of shoes to commit fraud or maybe just an honest mistake that the corrected when notified of such?

I know, every mistake ever is an attempt at fraud according to some.

[aeneas01]

Maybe they should thrown their own LOA in the trash and have Otismalibu write a LOA.....I mean they can still give a "waranty" on the item, but an LOA after this?

exactly - i really don't know how mears' original loa could still apply. if i were to offer my opinion on a unitas helmet for example, and state that it was his first year lid circa 1956, i don't know how this opinion could still hold water if i later discovered (or if it was brought to my attention by a fellow collector) that the helmet was in fact a circa 1962 unitas helmet. simply changing the date would equate to a dishonest opinion. i hope mears chimes in because imo this clearly isn't the best way to make a splash into the auction business - especially if mears is sincere about their advertised level of transparency.

as far as mears describing itself as a "research center" is concerned, dave grob explained to me in a recent email that the intent of his recent article ("Sey Hey") was to aslo "Introduce collectors to the idea that part of us buying this 15,000 square foot facility, was to make what we have available for their research, hence the name research and convention center." for the record, dave emphasized "their research" in bold.

...