Question about Cal Ripken jersey labeling

[rj_lucas]

I have a question regarding a 1991 Cal Ripken jersey, alleged to be game-used, that I’ve owned for about 15 years.

The tag shows a size of 44. I’ve always questioned that, because I wear a size 44 sport coat and the jersey hangs on me like a tent. I understand Ripken wore a size 48 during this period.

I’ve been told the size of a jersey can be determined by measuring between the bottom of the two sleeve seams and then doubling the number. As you can see from the picture below, this jersey measures exactly 24” between the bottom sleeve seams.

Do jerseys ever get mislabled, and assuming this were the case, is the value diminished? I'm also curious if anyone can confirm the validity of the sizing method described above.

Thanks for any input you might have.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[kingjammy24]

i've seen jerseys that weren't the size that they were labeled. whether these jerseys were legit or not, i don't know. your sizing m.o. is correct.

that said, there are a few things i noticed about your shirt.

1) near the tag, there seem to be some ghost stitches in a rectangular shape:

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/5569/silly.jpg

you can have a closer look and confirm whether there is indeed ghost stitching.

2) the nameplate arch seems to be overly severe:

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/476/silly2.jpg

3) the left and right edges of those rawlings tags were tucked under/hemmed. are your sides hemmed? they look as if they might've been cut/not hemmed under.

4) there's a considerable amount of puckering/wash wear on the numbers and the front team wordmark yet the tag shows almost no wash wear.

5) the color of the nameplate seems a little brighter than the rest of the jersey suggesting it was added later/restored/from a different material than would normally be used.

i could be entirely wrong on all counts as i can't see the jersey in-person but that's simply what struck me from the photos.

rudy.

[kingjammy24]

the sleeve trim on your ripken is black/orange/black. this is not the trim the orioles wore in 1991:

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/6444/sillyk.jpg

in 1991, they wore orange/black/orange trim. the sleeve trim seen on your jersey was worn 1989 only.

rudy.

[kingjammy24]

here is ripken from 1989-1991. note the sleeve trim sequence.

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/7634/sillyx.jpg

your shirt is a 1989 orioles shirt with a 1991 flag tag added to it. this, along with all of the other factors previously mentioned, leads to believe your shirt is a complete fabrication.

rudy.

[rj_lucas]

i've seen jerseys that weren't the size that they were labeled. whether these jerseys were legit or not, i don't know. your sizing m.o. is correct.

that said, there are a few things i noticed about your shirt.

1) near the tag, there seem to be some ghost stitches in a rectangular shape:

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/5569/silly.jpg

you can have a closer look and confirm whether there is indeed ghost stitching.

2) the nameplate arch seems to be overly severe:

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/476/silly2.jpg

3) the left and right edges of those rawlings tags were tucked under/hemmed. are your sides hemmed? they look as if they might've been cut/not hemmed under.

4) there's a considerable amount of puckering/wash wear on the numbers and the front team wordmark yet the tag shows almost no wash wear.

5) the color of the nameplate seems a little brighter than the rest of the jersey suggesting it was added later/restored/from a different material than would normally be used.

i could be entirely wrong on all counts as i can't see the jersey in-person but that's simply what struck me from the photos.

rudy.

Good info, thanks for that Rudy.

Before I dropped a few hundred bucks with PSA/DNA I wanted to at least make sure it passed the sniff test in regards to the sizing issue.

The marks below the tag are a snag; you can see it more clearly from the front as shown below.

Even so, it still may not be worth sending off to an authenticator, given some of your other observations. You'd think if somebody was going to fake a Ripken they'd at least use a size 48 tag, but I guess nothing surprises me.

Anyway, I can spread what I paid for it over 15+ years of display value in the rec room, so I'm not going to lose any sleep over it one way or another :). Thanks again.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[rj_lucas]

And I KNEW that someone on this forum could address this authoritatively. This is a great resource.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[kingjammy24]

photo evidence shows the following in regards to sleeve trim:

1989 - black/orange/black
1990 - orange/black/orange
1991 - orange/black/orange

1989 jersey with incorrect 1990+ sleeve trim: http://www.huntauctions.com/online/imageviewer.cfm?auction_num=7&lot_num=1046&lot_qual=

1989 jersey with correct 1989 sleeve trim:
http://www.americanmemorabilia.com/Auction_Item.asp?Auction_ID=15535

1991 jersey with incorrect 1989 sleeve trim:
http://www.huntauctions.com/online/imageviewer.cfm?auction_num=7&lot_num=1045&lot_qual=

rudy.

[kingjammy24]

some common player jerseys. sleeve trim on these is consistent with photos:

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/1442/sillyn.jpg

when the weasels who made up those ripkens were engaged in the task, i imagine they were swapping mfr tags and flag tags without any consideration to the sleeve trim. to them all of those orioles jerseys looked the same and they didn't even notice the difference in sleeve trim.

rudy.

[kingjammy24]

incidentally, the 1989 AMI ripken in this thread has a 1990-91 style rawlings tag.

rick, your jersey is a 1989-style orioles shirt but it has a 1990-91 style rawlings tag. i imagine whoever made it just took the mfr tag and 1991 flag tag from whatever jersey. you'd think they would've gotten a size 48 mfr tag to be consistent with the actual size of the shirt but perhaps they were under the impression at the time that ripken wore a 44.

rudy.

[ironmanfan]

good work Rudy......

[rj_lucas]

Great info for anyone who might be looking to make a similar purchase. Such is the beauty of the Internet; wish I'd had it back in '93 or '94 when I picked up the jersey.

I sure no one would be shocked to hear the jersey came with a COA signed by someone who (at least at the time) was thought to be a reputable authenticator.

A perfect example of why I no longer buy from dealers...or eBay...or auction houses...etc.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[sportscentury]

Great info for anyone who might be looking to make a similar purchase. Such is the beauty of the Internet; wish I'd had it back in '93 or '94 when I picked up the jersey.

I sure no one would be shocked to hear the jersey came with a COA signed by someone who (at least at the time) was thought to be a reputable authenticator.

A perfect example of why I no longer buy from dealers...or eBay...or auction houses...etc.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

Not sure how any legitimate authenticator could have put his John Hancock on this one. That said, there are some excellent, honest dealers (e.g., MeiGray), eBay sellers (too many to pick just one), and auction houses (e.g., GUU). Likewise, there are some dishonest non-dealer hobbyists. Best to take each one on an individual basis. Sorry about your Ripken, but it seems like you have a healthy attitude about it.

[sox83cubs84]

A respected Orioles collector told me in the mid-90's that all sorts of 1989-91 mis-sized, mistagged Ripkens were popping up due to NOB/number/tag changing of common player jerseys. The era in which this jersey was doctored may explain the off-sizing between what Cal Jr. wore and what the tag says...back then the doctorer may not have known.

Dave M.
Chicago area