Thoughts on a Dizzy Dean...

[jgmp123]

Please let me know your thoughts on the authenticity of this Dizzy Dean....

[ss]

Perfectly good.

[gashouse34]

James, what does the rest of the sheet look like? Are there other signatures? At first glance the dean looks ok to me but I'm far from an expert. I've seen a couple different variations of his signature.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Definitely not authentic.

[jgmp123]

James, what does the rest of the sheet look like? Are there other signatures? At first glance the dean looks ok to me but I'm far from an expert. I've seen a couple different variations of his signature.

The full sheet only has the word "Cubs" on it. It is an early signature from 1938...

[gashouse34]

Definitely not authentic.

Do you think this is a non malicious clubhouse?

[jgmp123]

Definitely not authentic.

Chris,

What's your reasoning? I have been told by two highly respected authenticators that it is 100% authentic....and no Travis, it wasn't PSA and JSA.

[jgmp123]

Do you think this is a non malicious clubhouse?

No. I believe it is 100% authentic. Chris and JoeD are the ones who feel it to be "not authentic".

[gashouse34]

Definitely not authentic.

No. I believe it is 100% authentic. Chris and JoeD are the ones who feel it to be "not authentic".

Not directed at you James. Was wondering what Chris' thoughts were.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Do you think this is a non malicious clubhouse?

Just a sloppy forgery.

Clubhouse? Possibly.

[jgmp123]

Chris,

I just don't see the obvious "just a sloppy forgery" that you do...and a number of others here feel it to be authentic as well.

Is that really all you can say? "Just a sloppy forgery"??

[Michael B]

Disclaimer: I am no expert in baseball HOF'er signatures. I recall seeing a few Dean's in person years ago and may have owned an index card or such signature in the mid 1980's. My greatest knowledge is Olympians, especially early ones.

I looked at it before reading any of the comments, which I usually do, to see if I can tell. At least half the time on these I am incorrect. There were several things that struck me as odd about this one. First is the downstroke on the first ‘D’. It was done twice, though what appears to be the first one would have given it a large loop. Also, as the loop goes over the top and approaches the top of the downstroke the line dips and there is also a stop, barely perceptible, but seems to be there. That loop also does not look smooth, but done slowly and thought out.

There is something about the tail of the ‘y’ that strikes me as odd, but that may just be me.

There is also something about the second ‘D’ that seems odd. There is a dip in the top of the loop just past the start of the first downstroke that looks like some hesitation. Also, that back part of the ‘D’ reminds me of the crystal skull in ‘Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull’. It seems that he had a signature with a lot of flair, but looks like someone was trying to copy it and could not.

As I said in the beginning: No expert on HOFers, but this is how I learn so please be kind. I usually just read the comments. Thought I would offer a perspective on this one.

[jgmp123]

Thanks Michael. I will say again that this was a young Dizzy (28 years old) and should not be compared to his later signatures. The autograph has been verified as authentic by both Richard and Jim. I trust both of their knowledge and opinions.

Thanks,
James

[David Atkatz]

Chris,

I just don't see the obvious "just a sloppy forgery" that you do...and a number of others here feel it to be authentic as well.

Is that really all you can say? "Just a sloppy forgery"??Chris has never seen a good forgery. Most of the time, they're "horrific." Doesn't matter how good it is, doesn't matter if it's genuine. If Chris doesn't like it, it's horrific.

If Jim says it's good, it's good.

[Michael B]

Thanks Michael. I will say again that this was a young Dizzy (28 years old) and should not be compared to his later signatures. The autograph has been verified as authentic by both Richard and Jim. I trust both of their knowledge and opinions.

Thanks,
James

Jim,

I respect that and I don't doubt the authenticity. I also trust and respect the opinion of both Richard and Jim S. I just looked at the signature and thought 'Why would I not like it?'. It was more a mental exercise than anything else which is why I had the disclaimer at the beginning and end.

It is always great to find a vintage signature of an athlete signed during their career. I just picked up an autograph album with a 1956 Bill Russell and was quite pleased to get it for what I believe to be a bargain.

Cheers,
Michael

[ss]

IMO, it is very consistent with his early to mid 30's style. My guess is the shakiness in the signature is the result of how it was signed, not who signed it.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Chris,

I just don't see the obvious "just a sloppy forgery" that you do...and a number of others here feel it to be authentic as well.

Is that really all you can say? "Just a sloppy forgery"??

James, you shouldn't have posted your Dizzy Dean if you didn't want anyone to opine on it.

The moment I looked at it I said to myself "definitely not Dizzy's sig."

[RCMcKenzie]

www.ebay.com/itm/120617222137

I think the signature is fairly consistent with the handwriting style seen on countless examples that you see. The OP's example does not have the typical apostophies flair, which you would think someone who could mimick the handwriting style would include.

[Runscott]

More experienced forum members have taught me that autographs can 'evolve', and I have never paid attention to Dizzy Dean;however, the double-line on the first 'D', and the hesitation and dips in the tops both 'D's would bother me. As with the weird Walter Johnson we discussed here, I would ask for an exemplar that showed these same supposedly 'early Dizzy' characteristics. If it is legit, they should be easy to find.

[Mr. Zipper]

I'll preface this by stating Dean is not my area of expertise, so take this for what it is worth...

Overall this signature appears to have a hesitant, tentative look. It's hard to describe, but I see "too much thinking" in it.

There is obvious wobble throughout both Ds. They were not executed smoothly and have an unusual "boxy" shape.

The "izzy" starts with a hard dot (hesitation) and the pen only sped up when he hit the "home stretch" ... the final loop of the y.

One could argue that it is an "in-hand" standing signature. Maybe that is the case, but the wobble I see here doesn't strike me as the same kind of shakiness you see with an in-hand signature.

I cannot state with certainty, but I think there is a valid case for reasonable doubt.

[jgmp123]

www.ebay.com/itm/120617222137

I think the signature is fairly consistent with the handwriting style seen on countless examples that you see. The OP's example does not have the typical apostophies flair, which you would think someone who could mimick the handwriting style would include.

This is also from 1942. Dizzys signature changed after 1938...hopefully Jim or Richard can add some light to this...

[thetruthisoutthere]

www.ebay.com/itm/120617222137

I think the signature is fairly consistent with the handwriting style seen on countless examples that you see. The OP's example does not have the typical apostophies flair, which you would think someone who could mimick the handwriting style would include.

I also believe the below Dizzy is a secretarial:

113017

The OP's Dizzy is simply not authentic:


113018

[johnmh71]

I agree. It's all in the "D"'s.

[Sean1125]

I had a dizzy identical to this on a PC and it got PSA/DNA if that says anything... I would just suggest sending it in for authentication I believe it to be good by "psa standards"

[JimStinson]

1939 Dean & 1946 Dean , For what its worth according to most accounts of the day Dizzy Dean was the 2nd most popular target of autograph collectors in the 1930's & early 1940's. Note the unusually long "dip" of the 'y" in Dizzy and lack of period on the lower case i in Dizzy , also lacking the "quotes" on first name
_______________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

web site click here
stinsonsports.com

[JimStinson]

And for good measure a 1932 Dean that looks nothing like any of them ..:)
____________________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

web site vintage autographs for sale daily click here
stinsonsports.com

[jgmp123]

Thanks Jim.

[JimStinson]

"Quickest Thinking of the Year: Pulled by Dizzy Dean the day in June when Babe Ruth made a personal appearance at Sportsman's Park. Diz was supposed to pitch to the Babe. Ruth stepped to the plate, but in his weakened condition, the bat dropped off his shoulder. Sensing danger in the situation, Diz stepped off the mound, strode to the plate and pointed to right field - where the Babe used to clout them. Everybody recognized the gesture immediately." - The Sporting News (1948)
____________________________
and...
"Well we're all ten years older today. Dizzy Dean is dead and 1934 is gone forever. Another part of our youth fled. You look in the mirror and the small boy no longer smiles back at you. Just that sad old man. The Gashouse Gang is now a duet. Dizzy died the other day at the age of 11 or 12. The little boy in all of us died with him. But, for one brief shining afternoon in 1934, he brought joy to that dreary time when most needed it. Dizzy Dean. It's impossible to say without a smile, but then who wants to try? If I know Diz he'll be calling God 'podner' someplace today. I hope there's golf courses or a card game or a slugger who's a sucker for a low outside fastball for Diz. He might have been what baseball's all about." - Jim Murray in Los Angeles Times on July 19, 1974
________________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

Web site Vintage autographs for sale daily
stinsonsports.com

[r2678]

That's a great Jim Murray quote.

[thetruthisoutthere]

I also believe the below Dizzy is a secretarial:

113017

The OP's Dizzy is simply not authentic:


113018

For the record, I stand behind both of my comments on the two Dizzy sigs.

The OP's is not authentic and the second one is a secretarial sig.

[bender07]

For the record, I stand behind both of my comments on the two Dizzy sigs.

The OP's is not authentic and the second one is a secretarial sig.

Agreed. The ebay one is secretarial.

[thetruthisoutthere]

1939 Dean & 1946 Dean , For what its worth according to most accounts of the day Dizzy Dean was the 2nd most popular target of autograph collectors in the 1930's & early 1940's. Note the unusually long "dip" of the 'y" in Dizzy and lack of period on the lower case i in Dizzy , also lacking the "quotes" on first name
_______________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

web site click here
stinsonsports.com

Jim, are you claiming that the same person penned both of the below sigs?

113062

[ss]

After reviewing every Dean exemplar I have, I change my view and agree with Chris.

[thecatspajamas]

"Quickest Thinking of the Year: Pulled by Dizzy Dean the day in June when Babe Ruth made a personal appearance at Sportsman's Park. Diz was supposed to pitch to the Babe. Ruth stepped to the plate, but in his weakened condition, the bat dropped off his shoulder. Sensing danger in the situation, Diz stepped off the mound, strode to the plate and pointed to right field - where the Babe used to clout them. Everybody recognized the gesture immediately." - The Sporting News (1948)


Sonuva...I just sold an original print of that photo (minus the signature) a couple of months ago. Had I known the whole story behind it, I probably could have gotten more, or more likely, wouldn't have sold it at all. That'll learn me to learn my baseball history better! Thanks for the lesson, Jim.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll13/thecatspajamas99/L-/25/L10410_1.jpg

[travrosty]

Jim, are you claiming that the same person penned both of the below sigs?

113062

why dont you show us why it's not real if you are so certain?

[joed25]

why dont you show us why it's not real if you are so certain?

Bec it looks nothing like it.