Enhancecd Stampings - Cy Young, Al Simmons & Walter John

[Centerfield]

A seller has three pre-war HoF endorsed gloves on eBay which all have ink enhanced stampings, though he doesn’t say so in his descriptions. For some collectors, this is a travesty and unacceptably unoriginal. For others, it doesn’t matter as much. Whatever side you take, I wanted to alert potential bidders who may not have noticed this.

This could lead to a meaningful discussion. How do you view ink on gloves, i.e. owners names written on them and enhanced stampings where ink is neatly placed within the imprints on the leather?

My views are pretty straight forward, I’d prefer no added ink whatsoever unless the glove is one of a kind or so rare that another is practically unattainable. Given a choice, however, I’d go with the untouched, inkless example every time. That said, the Cy Young and the Al Simmons gloves linked below really do look cool. I have a feeling, though, that most share my view in that sans-ink is better. With that, when the time comes to trade or sell, a glove’s value will appreciate more when it is unaltered.

P.S. Please do not grab a marker and begin filling in the stampings on your gloves!!!



http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Cy-Young-ba ... dZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Al-Simmons- ... dZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Walter-John ... dZViewItem

[vintagebrett]

I would definitely prefer that the stampings are not enhanced on a glove. With the examples that you gave, the Cy Young and Al Simmons look well done but the Walter Johnson is terrible - who's going to think that a glove in that condition would still have such a strong signature. I think it is terrible that the seller does not mention this in his listing.

[burker72]

Brett,

I just put up a similar post in the Glove of the Week thread (I didn't want you to think I was plagerizing). The Johnson is ridiculous. I will say the other two look impressive online, not sure how they would look in person though. I would not bid on any of them.

[burker72]

I am busy at work today, and was just checking out the Cy Young model. I'm not so positive that these stampings have been inked. The reason I say this is that the glove is in great shape, but more importantly, the word "Cincinnati" is just as dark despite being in very narrow, small font . I'm no expert in this, but could that be inked so neatly? Granted there are no close ups, but it looks pretty good in the pic.

The seller says the stampings are as bold as the day it was sold. The description does not elude to any doctoring of the stampings, if they were doctored this is a clear cut case of fraud.

[vintagebrett]

I've seen quite a few of these Cy Young gloves and the one's I've seen (if there was anything left) had silver stampings, rather than black. Also, all the other Hutch gloves I've come across, as far as I can remember, had the silver stampings. Has anyone seen one with black ink?

[Centerfield]

They either have the original silver or nothing at all in the stampings, never black. That's a sure sign that a Hutch has been inked. Same with the Simmons. They're plentiful, and never seen one with black stampings. It's inked as well.

[doubleSwitch]

Your opinion is not fair based on photo's maybe you were warning so we would not bid and you could snipe the items yourself? If it's stated in the auction that the glove is enhanced IE: Cleaned, Waxed, Conditioned,Inked, Made to look better in any way whatsoever to make more money, So what if the black or silver was replaced, as long as it's stated and it looks good. Thats is about as bad as relacing a glove? If those gloves are inked then they did an awsome job ! I'd buy those gloves. It all comes down to if you dont like it dont buy it. I say Ink away.

[vintagebrett]

The problem is there are no statements about being reinked in the listings - I think that is a major issue. If it was reinked, and the seller identified it as such, then the bidder has a decision whether he is comfortable with it or not. As you stated, you would be a bidder and some others have expressed a different opinion - they would not be a bidder. The main issue remains that there is no disclosure as to the reinking. If you look at other Cy Young gloves made by Hutch, they had the silver stamping not black. I've seen a handful in my time and I'm sure Centerfield has seen plenty considering he had owned many of the finest gloves in the hobby. You eluded to relacing - same thing, some people are comfortable buying relaced gloves, some are not. However, I think it should be disclosed to the buyer as well.

[vintagebrett]

Here are some examples of Hutch Cy Youngs gloves that have sold in the past - notice the lack of black in any of the stampings:

http://www.huntauctions.com/online/imageviewer.cfm?auction_num=29&lot_num=679&lot_qual=

http://www.huntauctions.com/online/imageviewer.cfm?auction_num=25&lot_num=636&lot_qual=

http://www.huntauctions.com/online/imageviewer.cfm?auction_num=16&lot_num=963&lot_qual=

[Centerfield]

DoubleSwich... I think you need to reread my original post at the top of the thread. Some collectors care, and some don't. It is unfair, however, to sell something without stating enhancements. Some collectors have never handled a Young or a Simmons before and they may not know that the black ink in the stampings is
not original to the glove. I admitted that the gloves do look nice, but I also stated that I do not approve of it. If you disagree, so be it. There are a hell of a lot more collectors like me out there who, given the choice, would not buy an enhanced glove. It's essential for the buyer to know this. Inevitably, he will resell the glove at a later date (1, 2, 10 years down the line) and perhaps not recoup his costs based on not understanding this issue at the present time.

It is a major issue in the hobby. Some repair gloves and approve of it, others don't. I clean gloves, but never have enhanced nor relace them. I have owned a glove which had the stampings enhanced with ink by a previous owner and loved it (wish I had it back). When I sold it, I was completely truthful about it. The current owner doesn't care. On the other hand, I have never owned a relaced glove and never plan to. To me, it is sacrilegious to bind old leather with new.

That leads to another discussion. I recently purchased a Ken Wel basemitt where one of the two straps that attach to the buckle was cut many years ago. I searched and searched until I could find another Ken Wel basemitt with an identical strap. I found a beater with a nice strap and replaced it with another vintage strap from the same manufacturer. To me, this is acceptable. I would never have replaced it with a modern strap. When the time comes for me to sell it, whenever that may be, I will show photos of the basemitt before and after the surgery, as well as photos of the miit that donated the replacement strap.

That's truth in advertising and complete transparency, I pride myself on it. I began this thread to educate those who do not have the experience to notice the enhancements to three gloves currently on eBay. Bid on them if you want or don't, if that's your penchant. I remember an enhanced Ruth glove on eBay years ago that lead to an unresolved lawsuit where the buyer lost thousands of dollars and was stuck with a glove he could not resell. I was simply hoping to avoid this happening to others.

[burker72]

To go along with Centerfield, think about other collecting hobbies and how carefully restoration is regarded. Take for example collectible cars. Great care is taken regarding what is and is not original on the car - matching serial numbers, etc. Ok, I know that the car market is different in scale (we're talking about a few hundred with the gloves versus upwards of a few hundred thousand with cars) but in principle I think the comparison with other hobbies is very reasonable.

I think it absurd and out of line to try and accuse Brett, or others on the forum (but especially Brett), of trying to sabotage the bidding on this glove. The glove was already over $600 at the time. Futhermore, if bidding was held down it would only be a result of full disclosure and better information, I'm not sure there is anything wrong with that.

[doubleSwitch]

I said to that it has to be listed in the decription if a glove has been reinked or not. All's i'm saying in the case of a rare glove that comes up maybe once or twice in a year. I could care less. Even Brett's Dad Crack of the bat Reinks bats. Also i might add charges alot because it is alot of work. Reinking is the same as relacing and cleaning and conditiong. It's all the same. If it's disclosed, it's not a problem for me. There are alot of people who buy from antique stores collector shows. I'm sure aot of things there are not disclosed as well. Burker i was being sarastic and it was not toward Brett...It all comes down to if you want the glove that bad or not. I'm sure everyone here being obssesed as we are knows that when you want a certain glove bad enough a Reinked glove wont make the difference.

[Centerfield]

Cool.. We're close to being on the same page. A glove's owner can do whatever he wants to it because he owns it. If inking it or relacing it makes him happy, go for it, good for him. I think, though, he should be aware of general market sentiment toward such practices. On resale, it generally reduces desireability resulting in a lower price. It's a choice the owner must make. To many collectors, restoration of any kind is quite apparent and they make a judgement call as to persure the glove or not. Hell, my feelings are quite apparent toward the subject but I even bought an inked glove once because I really wanted it. It was a glove I had to have and my priorities temporarily changed for that one glove. Perhaps the bidders on the Cy Young feel the same. That's their choice. If, however, the bidders lack the background to know the glove has been enhanced, and the seller has not disclosed this, I think that's unfair. We're not too far off in our thinking!

Burker... fantastic analogy to classic cars! I wholeheartedly agree. Cleaning is a generally accepted practice, though there's a grey area for other types of restoration. Some agree with it and do it regularly, others despise it. It comes down to personal preference. It seems to be more acceptable for modern gloves and rarely seen with pre-war gloves. If the parts are original, and it's done well, I wouldn't have a problem with it. But again, given a choice between a restored glove (with original, vintage parts) and a one that's completely original... I'd always go for the unaltered example.

[vintagebrett]

Glad we are all on the same page - I think it's important that a seller discloses all of the work that has been done on an item, regardless of what it is. If I relace a glove or my dad fixes a bat, we always make sure to tell potential buyers what has been done and I hope someone I was buying an item from would do the same.