Another Bad Bat From Cali Sports Investments- Mcgwire "gu Bat"

[panthrotc]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160557696149&ssPageName=ADME:X:AAQ:US:1123

This bat is a Game Model bat that has been doctored. The Pine Tar Pattern does not match Mac's pattern for the Rawlings model which was used from 90-96. But, CSI obviously does not put enough effort in covering their tracks because the dead giveaway is the Absence of the MODEL NUMBER LABELING AND BATCH CODE.

McGwire had 2 different kinds of labels while he played:

256 B and MAC25 along with the batch number and 2 digit year indicator.

Their Is NEITHER on this bat. Also a Poor Attempt at writing "25 on the end knobs.

The seller says it comes with a COA from California Sports Investments.

OUCH. I informed the seller about the reputation of CSI and the problems with his McGwire Bat.

[Bondsgloves]

How do you know the bat is from California investments? the seller doesn't show the COA. In fact even if you saw the LOA you would have to make sure it is matched to this bat. Before you bash California Sports Inv. you should really make sure the bat was really purchased from them and LOA is for the same bat. California Investments sells a lot of nice high end gamers, so I think its unfair to make these statements without verifying the facts. Just my opinion.

[metsbats]

I contacted Ron this morning regarding this bat on ebay as I found it hard to believe that with his experience in dealing with game used bats he would miss the stamping on the knob and try to pass it off as a gamer.

In fact I went back to CSI advertisements from SCD from the 90's which I collected and saw that almost all of his Rawlings bats for sale in these ads has specific years attached to a bat.

Ron could not remember selling this bat out of his inventory and confirmed that he would have flagged the bat as a non-gamer if it didn't have the proper stamping. He also mentioned that without the content of the COA as to the description and date and without seeing the bat in person it'll be hard to know for sure.

I've reached out to the seller to ask for details of the CSI COA and it 'll be interesting to see what it says.

There are cases where legit COAs are attached to other items.

I'd like to reiterate what bondgloves stated and we should weigh the rest of these facts before outright bashing CSI or anyone for that matter.

[panthrotc]

I purchased a 98 "game used " bat from a seller on ebay about 7 years ago. The coa was from csi. The amount of pine tar along with the use did not sit well. Also comparing it to other mcgwire legit gamers from 98 there was several red flags. I emailed pictures to jeff scott who has seen and handled more mcgwire bats from his cardinal days then anyone i can think of. He confirmed my suspicions. The pine tar specifications just did not match.

The bat was most likely not used but most likely doctored up by "someone".

Here is the bat all the way at the bottom compared to other mcgwire cardinal bats.

http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t25/longball98/The%20McGwire%20Collection/Autographed%20Memorabilia/GAME%20USED/GU%20Close%20Up%20Pictures/bats-1.jpg

I ended up getting the bat signed ip and traded it along with cash for the 01 hr bat. I still have the coa from csi that i made a copy of. Im not saying csi doctored it, but with known doctored stuff they did in the past you can make your own decision.

The bat on ebay, if it does indeed have a coa from csi that goes along with it then csi knows Jack squat about mcgwire game used bats or they were clearly just focused on making cash by labeling it game used and ignoring the criteria that goes along with mcgwire gamer characteristics. Well just wait and see what the coa says before we pass judgement

[metsbats]

Regarding your suspect 98 gamer which Jeff confirmed that the pine tar was not right why didn't you confront Ron from CSI or return it to the seller (so he can do that) instead of passing it on to another unsuspecting collector via a trade up? It seem that the CSI COA was good when you were trading but not good enough to keep in your collection.

[Bondsgloves]

So you are bashing CSI for selling you something that you believed to be bad and than traded to someone as if it was the real deal when you know its bad. :rolleyes:

[panthrotc]

I told the person the circumstances surrounding the bat. They did not care as they planned on selling it after the deal was made.

I did not realize the circumstsnces about the 98 until about 5 years after i purchased the bat. I assumed Ron could not do anything for me.

What would he do? Buy the bat back??

I got burned as did the person i got it from.

[panthrotc]

Regarding your suspect 98 gamer which Jeff confirmed that the pine tar was not right why didn't you confront Ron from CSI or return it to the seller (so he can do that) instead of passing it on to another unsuspecting collector via a trade up? It seem that the CSI COA was good when you were trading but not good enough to keep in your collection.


I got the bat autographed after the fact. The bat was traded as a signed 98 model bat. The person who i traded the bat to did not care about the supposed use. He liked it because it was signed. He did not plan on keeping it .He ended up selling the bat as a autographed game used bat.

[cjmedina1]

panthrotc (http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/member.php?u=775)

I know this is off topic but I've been out of the hobby for a few years... Just wanted to say hi and your collection is pretty awsome.... Take care

Carlie Medina III
carliemedinaiii@gmail.com

[legaleagle92481]

I don't think it is fair to blame CSI because even if he has a CSI COA noone can prove that such is the COA that goes with this bat. I don't think CSI uses holograms and what would stop someone from switching a certificate? Or copying a certificate? I was a big autograph guy and people used to do that all the time with Scoreboard COAs. I think before you call someone out you need more evidence especially where the person being called out is not the seller. If anyone the current seller should be called out because when you sell something you owe it to people to make sure what your selling is what you claim it is to the best of your ability. Your citing problems with the bat that simple research would have uncovered. In my book both buyers and sellers need to do their homework. For a seller reputation should be more important than the few hundred you can make by selling a questionable item. It seems like you just have a personal vendetta with CSI.

[panthrotc]

I don't think it is fair to blame CSI because even if he has a CSI COA noone can prove that such is the COA that goes with this bat. I don't think CSI uses holograms and what would stop someone from switching a certificate? Or copying a certificate? I was a big autograph guy and people used to do that all the time with Scoreboard COAs. I think before you call someone out you need more evidence especially where the person being called out is not the seller. If anyone the current seller should be called out because when you sell something you owe it to people to make sure what your selling is what you claim it is to the best of your ability. Your citing problems with the bat that simple research would have uncovered. In my book both buyers and sellers need to do their homework. For a seller reputation should be more important than the few hundred you can make by selling a questionable item. It seems like you just have a personal vendetta with CSI.

Your right

I messaged the seller of the bat stating the red flags with the bat

He still has not responded. There is already a bid on the bat which is sad.