Spalding Ruth

[doubleSwitch]

Ebay Item #270100641527

I'm sure everyone has seen the Ruth Spalding glove already.

I just bumped it up to $550.00 I just wish though Ebay would

go back to the old way of bidding and not hide the bidder identities.

I would probably bid alot higher knowing there were not bidders

with 0 feedback. But then on the other hand one might think and

take into consideration the actual value of the glove, regardless

of shill bidding and so forth. Then other collectors might think the

glove is priceless to fill a hole into their collection. Personally i still

think i want to see who's bidding. I mean even though after dropping

a few bills on an artifact, i want the peace of mind knowing everything

was legit. In no way i'm saying MLB11 would place shill bidders, I'm just

saying in general in all auctions. MLB11 sure has a nice Ruth though.

i would have a tough time letting that beauty go...

[MVALZ]

i would have a tough time letting that beauty go...

He might be having a hard time parting with it too...who knows where that reserve is set. He says he saw another go for $3500...reserve probably $1k+. Good luck Bidder # 3!!

[mjkm90]

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't think that glove will reach $1,000. It has a lot of ink on it, trashed lining, dates from after his playing days probably, and has vinyl piping. It is one of the lower end Ruth's available.

[doubleSwitch]

Ummm better check again....

[Mike**Mize]

As someone who has collected Ruth gloves and sold one on eBay I don't know, maybe I'm missing something here...but...I would want to know the model number of this one before I ventured out with a substancial bid. There are Ruth gloves and there are RUTH GLOVES, even in the pre-war catagories. This one looks a lot like a mid to late 30's Ruth which really wasn't such a tremendous glove. If this is a 20's Ruth, I want to hear about it being stamped WW or MO. The signature is very nice, but would serious collector spend as much on an MM5, 6 or 9 as an MMP or an XPG6?
I remember when I sold my Ruth 259, I spelled all that out. It was a late model Ruth glove and while it had value for the signature, it wasn't a heyday glove. I'm not sure this one is either.

[stockbuddy]

Mike, I would agree with you. With the single horizontal tunnel web and bottom half laced on the web, it seems like a 1930's glove to me. Also, moving further away from the player's career days seems to take the steam out of the glove's collector appeal and perhaps the price. Nonetheless, a very nice glove.

Dave

[Mike**Mize]

I guess we can conclude that it's high season for certain kinds of gloves (if you're a seller). Plus, this one was described in a way that really made it compelling and exciting. I like top, or near top, of the line gloves. When you spend time looking them over and cleaning them, the differences are glaring. Not only are they prettier. they're just so remarkably better made.
Each to his own I guess. I know I'm sitting on an extra top of the line Reach Ruth that I'd like to sell one day soon. If I can do 3/4's as well as this seller, I'll be completely satisfied.

[burker72]

Here is the way I look at it. Assuming you have a limited amount of resources to dedicate to buying gloves (except for all of you retired millionaires out there) and you are in the running to buy a premium glove, say in excess of $1,000, would you go for the Ruth or for the Spalding Joe DiMaggio buckleback that sold a day or two ago?

The Ruth glove is now at $900+ with more than 4 days to go and very well could surpass the DiMaggio at $1380. I would say the DiMaggio is a very rare model, from a popular endorser, and it is in great shape.

With little knowledge of the subtleties of Ruth models, my vote is for the DiMaggio (not even close).

[Mike**Mize]

I'm with you. No contest. Eventhough the DiMaggio glove is mid range, it's one of the very first DiMaggio gloves and it appears to be in incredible condition. I guess what I'm getting at is that from a pure workmanship standpoint, there's somthing to be said for trying to find the Spalding 202, 204 or the Joe Cronin from that same year (1939). The linings on these top gloves are so thick and sturdy. All the seams around the individual fingers are reinforsed. The binding is leather.
Still that's not the focus for many collectors, which is perfectly OK.

[vintagebrett]

I'm surprised there wasn't more interest in the Ruth glove in the Leland's auction that ended over the weekend:

http://www.lelands.com/bid.aspx?auctionid=702&lot=327

Glove looks to be in very good shape and still has silver in the stamping. I was the underbidder but whoever was the high bidder did pretty well, in my opinion anyway.

Does it annoy anyone else that major auction houses never show both sides of a glove or is it just me?

[ebbets55]

Brett,

I didn't even see that glove in Leland's. Wish I did. I would have paid a lot more for it. I have that same glove (RF2). It's a full web and is super high quality with the web folded over so it's double thick. This model has a thick lining and a Spalding tag and button. It's a nice model.

There's been a lot of talk about that Spalding on Ebay now. I prefer the Spalding Ruth's from the 20's myself but in my opinion, any Ruth is worth having. (I know I'm biased as Ruth is the only endorser I collect.) The Leland's Reach is a lot nicer model and went for a lot less. Go figure.

One last note to the newer collectors. This Reach Ruth is a perfect example of full webs going well into the late 20's. Even though Reach had that 1908 Patent Date, full webs were made throughout the 20's.

JD

P.S. - Someone please find me the cataloged Horace Partridge Ruth ; )