I'n new memeber, Babe Ruth help

[Pickles]

Hello. Just recently joined after reading a lot of he discussions, I found it appealing and informative. I do hope to contribute as I get more familiar

I want to start with a recently acquired (by far my largest investment) 1929 NYY signed ball. Ball has a cert, and I'll discuss that later, but, as I have read over the past few months, PSA, JSA, etc are far from infallible, and sometimes their allegiances/motives have been questioned. I see that there are enough knowledgeable folks where a reasonable discussion can be started. I'll start with the Ruth signature. The ball is not in the greatest of condition, as it appears some prior owner saw it fit to play with it. I have spent a fair amount of time studying signatures, and would like to get other points of view. I hope to learn and also hope to give back some. Here is the Ruth sweet spot side. Comments and feedback appreciated. (You should be able to see all sides, but I will post other links as needed)
Again, looking for feedback on what you see. Specifically: is the Ruth auto legitimate? What are the features that drive one to a conclusion?
http://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1929-new-york-yankees-team-signed-baseball/a/7120-81507.s#1185111851503

[Teamgluck]

Welcome to the forum!

There are many people on here i would trust of their opinions. I commonly see them say to ask about their opinions before purchasing rather than after doing so. It is Christmas so responses maybe a little slow today but I'm sure people with more expertise like Richard Simon, Jim Stinson, Shelly etc will get back to you shortly.

[Runscott]

You are selling it for $3,500?

[Runscott]

So the question isn't "is it real?", but rather: "anyone want to buy this for $3,500?"

[sbfinley]

So the question isn't "is it real?", but rather: "anyone want to buy this for $3,500?"

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on this, he wasn't spamming a consigned auction item but instead the link to a closed auction purchase at a house that just happens to provide the "offer the winner" service. He could have just as easily offered it in the B/S/T. In my opinion the ball is good, but opinions are bountiful in these woods.

[Pickles]

OK, s I have to manage the HA website better. I was using it as a database, and I am CERTAIN I put down not taking any offers. The $3500 is what the HAa auctioneer thought it would go for. I am not selling at any price now. Hopefully the HA website reflects that

[Runscott]

I am on a phone and not able to see large pics, but $3,500 seems low given the bold Ruth.

HA doesn't randomly say the owner will sell their item and assign a price without the owner's permission. If they did that to you I would definitely complain. My guess is that Chris will quickly refute that such a thing occurred.

[Pickles]

How about we table any HA discussion and focus on the original thread? The Ruth Signature

The HA site does have very large resolution, so I have had time to analyze the signature. It is not great, but >90% there. All signatures except M Huggins are deemed authentic, Huggins being a clubhouse, which is easy to spot. I am looking to learn and share clues on what makes a Ruth signature authentic.

[Runscott]

Well Pickles, this is a discussion forum so unless someone brings up religion or politics, you might have to deal with responses that are not exactly what you want.

Welcome and Merry Christmas.

[Pickles]

Fair enough, just wanted to stay on topic as much as possible.
So does it lookk like a real Ruth or a clubhouse?

[Runscott]

To me it looks good. But I can only see the Ruth and it is a phone pic.

[Pickles]

The other ones are not as sharp, but readable. Lazzeri comes out ok, Gehrig is poor, but better than 60%. I've been able to solve 21 of them with a maybe (Cedric Durat) It was a tough trade between quality, and the authenticity that comes with it, and a sharper signature. HA too a lot of time t take some high quality pictures.

[David Atkatz]

To be frank, Pickles, you've got a lot to learn. First, authenticity doesn't come with quality--the two are completely independent. And "what makes a signature authentic" is that it has actually been signed by the person in question. Nothing else.

That being said, your ball is authentic--it is in poor condition, but it is authentic.

[Forever Young]

I want to change my name to pickles. I give you a 10 on the name. I have no opinion on the autograph.

[Leon]

I want to change my name to pickles. I give you a 10 on the name. I have no opinion on the autograph.

Be careful on what you ask for. You know how this board can make things happen :).

Welcome aboard Pickles. Hope you join in discussions as you seemed to have tamed Scott F quite well. (just kidding Scott)

[Pickles]

To be frank, Pickles, you've got a lot to learn. First, authenticity doesn't come with quality--the two are completely independent. And "what makes a signature authentic" is that it has actually been signed by the person in question. Nothing else.

That being said, your ball is authentic--it is in poor condition, but it is authentic.

Thanks. I will always have a lot to learn, which is part of the reason I am here.
This is how I see the equation
(Authenticity)*(Quality) = Cost (* means multiplied by if one is not mathematically inclined)

To keep cost down, you give up ononeor the other.
With my budget, and wanting to own authentic, I knew I'd be sacrificing qualities.
So, as I do homework and find that sigs are consistent with players style, and there are 21 or so, you are left with either an authentic ball or a very well executed forgery of 20 names, but not Huggins, made on a low quality ball.
Ball is of thetime, ink is worn out, etc. And, thankfully, the Babe is the best sig of all, in the range of a 4 or so. Remaining "threat" is that it may bea good clubhouse sig. My limited experinece on seeing Babe's clubhouses suggest one may have ahigher probability of discriminating a C/H vs a forgery. At least, I can do that on eBay with a higher confiden e than say a suspect graded card. My logic ks not fool proof, but makes sense to me.

In a way, the more positive feedback I get from a forum of above average knowledge, with folks who have no dog in the fight, so to speak, on my buying the ball, goes a long way to increase confidence.
Thanks for the thoughts, and keep them coming.

[Runscott]

Be careful on what you ask for. You know how this board can make things happen :).

Welcome aboard Pickles. Hope you join in discussions as you seemed to have tamed Scott F quite well. (just kidding Scott)

:) It was Christmas Day!

Also, I love new 'memebers'

[Lordstan]

Unfortunately, Mr Pickles, your math analogy is flawed because authenticity is a yes or no, not a degree. In your formula, the authentic number can only be 0 or 1, with 0 being not authentic and 1 being authentic. If the item is not authentic then (0) * (anything) = 0. A perfect ball with perfect signatures that are all not authentic is worth nothing to an autograph collector. It might be worth something to someone who just wants a ball to display, as that person doesn't likely care if it's real or not.
If the autos are real, then the price is a function of many variables including sig quality, item signed, who sees it when it comes to auction and how much money they have available to spend at that moment, plus a bunch of others.
If an item is not real, it may still have some value in some circumstances. For instance are rare early American League ball with a fake auto is still a rare ball that ball collectors might want, etc. Another variable is a multi signed item, like the team ball you posted. Having fake sigs on a team ball will lower the price proportionally based upon who is fake in relation to the price of a fully authentic copy of the same ball. As an extreme example, a 27 Yankees team ball where all the sigs are fake except for Giard, still has quite a bit of value. Same ball, but only Koenig is real is worth much much less.
BTW, I also think the Ruth is good.
Mark

[Pickles]

I will try not to re-quote the full message as it is lengthy.
Your 0/1 binary model describes an ideal world where "truth" is absolute and can be established.
I could have been a bit more detailed on the simplistic model, as I refer to a "confidence level" that the ball is authentic vs whether it is or not.
Simply put, since there is a very small, near zero probability that there were any witnesses to the signing, then us mortals will never know for sure that it is authentic. At this point, we must rely on statistical means to determine a confidence. Let's say that "experts" are right 2/3 of the time and wrong 1/3, If more than 2 experts agree on an outcome (1=true, 0= fase), then you are in the 90%+ chance of the outcome being correct at a 50% confidence level. I will not bore the readers with the proof, but it is based on math/stats. At some point, however, when it comes down to figuring out the price one is willing to pay, my point was I rather have a higher confidence on authenticity than on the quality of the sig (for a given $ value, since an authentic 10 Ruth is not likely to go for $2100)
BTW, I do appreciate your comment on Giard vs Koenig. Realistically, however, Ruth, Gehrig, Lazzeri and Pennock carry this ball in what I would call a 50/25/15/10 ratio, since we know Huggins is clubhouse

[Pickles]

BTW Mark (Lordstan)

An 1nteresting side note, let's keep it simple:

You have a Ruth auto (paper) which, if authentic is worth >$10K (eBay numbers)
If not authentic is worth #0.02
It can be bought for $2000
You consult 2 of your most trusted experts, call them Peter and Joseph. One says is authentic, one says is not. You also believe it is authentic. So it is 2:1

Do you pull the trigger at $2,000, (20% of BV) or do you have to be above a specific threshold (say 9 out of 10 experts) to get there????

[w7imel]

Pickles if an "expert" is only 2/3 at being right then IMO they aren't much of an expert. While PSA and JSA have made some mistakes I dont belive both of them would get this ball wrong. I belive the ball to be authentic. Do not see any reason that a forger would make a ball with signatures this faded and rough. Just my opinion.

[Runscott]

We have had some very interesting thoughts lately in this forum, on how to decide when to buy an expensive autograph. I recommend using this sub-forum as an educational tool to help you learn how to authenticate autographs that you are interested in learning more about, for a future purchase, but taking a vote here and then making a decision, is nonsense.

(feather ruffling time) A good example would be the recent Mantle thread where more than half of the posters said it was good. Everyone who knew Mantle autographs said it was bad, but most of those people said it offline via email and phone conversations - they just didn't want to get into a forum fight, while I don't mind at all. By my count, the meaningful vote ended up being 5-0 against (I did not include my vote), but the forum vote was 4-3 (or close to it) in favor of. I'm not dis'ing the forum opinions, as two of them were well-thought-out and explained;however, the OP ended up buying a bad Mantle because of our forum and the information it provided.

On the other hand, that discussion was great if the OP was trying to learn about Mantle autographs, but wasn't planning to make an immediate purchase. Accumulate enough knowledge to be confident enough to make a decision on your own, then contact people you trust to validate your decision, and THEN buy.

[Runscott]

BTW Mark (Lordstan)

An 1nteresting side note, let's keep it simple:

You have a Ruth auto (paper) which, if authentic is worth >$10K (eBay numbers)
If not authentic is worth #0.02
It can be bought for $2000
You consult 2 of your most trusted experts, call them Peter and Joseph. One says is authentic, one says is not. You also believe it is authentic. So it is 2:1

Do you pull the trigger at $2,000, (20% of BV) or do you have to be above a specific threshold (say 9 out of 10 experts) to get there????

It is generally not that black and white. If you know the autograph well enough to feel good about it, then call your two experts to validate your own EXPERT opinion, you are more likely to have one say "I like it" and one say "I don't feel comfortable with it", then "authentic" and "not authentic". You then find out why the "no" guy has his opinion and you address his concerns. He might very well change his opinion. I have had this happen many times.

If you want to buy an expensive autograph, you are not an expert, but you know two experts who tell you "I like it" and "I don't feel comfortable with it", and you trust each opinion equally, then I would not buy it. Becoming somewhat of an expert yourself opens you up to a much larger part of the hobby.

[Lordstan]

BTW Mark (Lordstan)

An 1nteresting side note, let's keep it simple:

You have a Ruth auto (paper) which, if authentic is worth >$10K (eBay numbers)
If not authentic is worth #0.02
It can be bought for $2000
You consult 2 of your most trusted experts, call them Peter and Joseph. One says is authentic, one says is not. You also believe it is authentic. So it is 2:1

Do you pull the trigger at $2,000, (20% of BV) or do you have to be above a specific threshold (say 9 out of 10 experts) to get there????

I will answer both of your posts in one.
The detail you added about confidence level in the sig is very important, as you are correct that that is variable. I will say that I think many people see the decision in a more binary fashion. If they feel, based upon whatever evidence they have, that a sig is good, they will pay whatever they are willing to pay. If they feel it isn't good, they will pay nothing.
To simplify, in order to keep your price low, you would rather accept a lower quality item. Sounds very reasonable.

Regarding your example above, first, the going rate of a decent Ruth cut is around $3k ish(10K prices are only seen in the ebay museums). Second, If a listing has a BIN that is that low, say 20% of value, for something as liquid as a Babe Ruth auto, it automatically sets off warning bells. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen, because it does, but it raises my level of skeptcism. Suppose the auto looks good, but it is a copy? I've seen that done. Now that I think about it, having a price too low might make me not buy something regardless of the form of the auto or opinion of others, because I am worried about what is not being revealed.
There is no magic number for how many experts think something is good or bad, especially when none of the people whose opinions your getting have actually seen the item in person.

My absolute answer to the above scenario is that it would depend on many factors. What are the specifics of the item? Is it something I need to complete a set? Why do I feel it's good vs why does the one buddy think it's bad? How much money do I have available? Is there anything else up for sale at the same time that I want more? Am I looking to keep it or flip it? This is a really important question as I am much more willing to accept something not perfect if I am going to keep it. If I am reselling, I want as perfect as possible to reduce the likelihood of problems or returns down the line.

Good discussion. Welcome to the board.
Mark

[Lordstan]

It is generally not that black and white. If you know the autograph well enough to feel good about it, then call your two experts to validate your own EXPERT opinion, you are more likely to have one say "I like it" and one say "I don't feel comfortable with it", then "authentic" and "not authentic". You then find out why the "no" guy has his opinion and you address his concerns. He might very well change his opinion. I have had this happen many times.

If you want to buy an expensive autograph, you are not an expert, but you know two experts who tell you "I like it" and "I don't feel comfortable with it", and you trust each opinion equally, then I would not buy it. Becoming somewhat of an expert yourself opens you up to a much larger part of the hobby.

Exactly.
This is what I was trying to say as well.

[w7imel]

It is generally not that black and white. If you know the autograph well enough to feel good about it, then call your two experts to validate your own EXPERT opinion, you are more likely to have one say "I like it" and one say "I don't feel comfortable with it", then "authentic" and "not authentic". You then find out why the "no" guy has his opinion and you address his concerns. He might very well change his opinion. I have had this happen many times.

If you want to buy an expensive autograph, you are not an expert, but you know two experts who tell you "I like it" and "I don't feel comfortable with it", and you trust each opinion equally, then I would not buy it. Becoming somewhat of an expert yourself opens you up to a much larger part of the hobby.

Learning an autograph of of a player, Babe Ruth being the signature of this topic can also be fun and fulfilling as well. I am also new to this forum this year and have enjoyed learning about "what make an autograph authentic". I enjoy a purchase better when I feel I have done the legwork to make sure its authentic. And mr pickles everyone goes thru this when they buy a high dollar item so by learning a signature before purchasing goes along way to ease any anxiety you may have when purchasing. Welcome aboard the forum!!

[Pickles]

Interesting dialogue and one worth the time to analyze. My question on the 2k/10k (or a 5:1 value ratio) is a daily question in business for managers/CEOs etc on how to gamble to grow a company. Clearly if you can take a risk/reward ratio less than 1, then make it up in volume ad do it. Autographs is unfortunately not that simpl, and, when using one's own finances, the risk/reward ratio has to be much lower (0.1 or less) to make it a good thing.

I am getting the anticipated outcome (agree with the auto) and a lot of subjective (though not less valuable) insight. What I am missing is perhaps more technical detail (ie comments on the teardrop R, the stick "t", the "B", the "b") which may be "tribal knowledge" details of use to me and others.

Both PSA (Grad signature) and JSA (JSA III) authenticated and I have the LOA's. I was actually very impressed with JS III, as he actually identified 18 of the 21 (or 22) signatures. Only one I have no been able to "find" is Koenig, ad personally, I do not believe he is there, but, it takes a few minutes to figure those sigs out, and, in my case, had there not been a similar, higher quality ball on eBay (1929 NYY) it would have been far more time consuming.

So perhaps it may be worth re-directing the thread into a mmore technical analysis of the autos. I will kick it off: Both PSA and JSA identified Bill Dickey's auto. It is not easy to find, and I equate it to the old joke fo finding a pile of manure and concluding there is a pony, just have to find it. If I talk myself into it, I think I can see the slant on the Y and the Bill part of it (on the Lazzeri panel) but not something easily spottable.

[Pickles]

I had done the homework, but mostly in a vacuum. Read a lot of articles, studied the signatures, compared, etc. I had reached a point of diminishing returns since all conclusions I could have reached, I had already reached (It was likely to be authentic) The PSA and JSA agreements, which, in hindsight may have been Gutierrez at HA ding the setup and the other 2 TPAs doing the rubber stamping was a bonus. When you look at it, HA added a lot of value in 2 certs + a Gutierrez evaluation and a lot fo good pictures.

What I found lacking in my research, and look for here is the interaction with other knowledgeable people, preferably with no skin in the game, in the hopes that they offer a different perspective, POV, or approach to doing this. Hopefully we can go from the "Yes" or "No" not authentic (I think the preponderance says "Yes") to why one thinks it is.

It is easy to get discouraged (Hauls of Shame) about some of the stuff that goes on in the hobby, and, without interaction, it is even easier to be cynical about motives by TPAs, auction houses, etc, who do have a lot of skin in the game. I'd like to think that carrying out this discussions allow the INDIVIDUALS a voice whcih, when compiled can be a greater voice. Thanks for taking te time to put thoughts. I may not agree with them all, but they are respected

[w7imel]

Psa and Jsa also have the equipment and years of experience identifying the 1929 yankees signatures as well. This is not the first yankee team ball that has been sent to them. I dont think you can look at autograph collecting the same way as you would run a company unless that you are planning on doing it for a living. I have bought things that I know I overpaid for and would never be able to sell it for the amount I paid because it was the right autograph for me.

[Runscott]

I don't want to turn your thread into a 'TPA bashing' thread; however, I don't include JSA or PSA (or SGC now) authentication in my decision process. If the autograph is good, and I think I might re-sell it, then such add-ons go into pricing, and I don't throw away COA's.

Applying the above: Just out of curiosity, how do you feel about someone saying: "I feel 90% certain that this autograph is real, therefore I think the 50% discount price is fair." I use '90%' in my example, but I could have used a much lower confidence % for some collectors (see the recent Mantle thread).

After you've made your decision about the previous example, let's say the top two TPA's are right about 90% of the Ruths they have authenticated. I personally think the number is lower, but you could even go with 95%. If you then assume a Ruth signature you want to purchase is real because one of the top TPA's says it is, and you aren't very knowledgeable, you run the risk of buying one from the 5-10% group of fails. Is it worth it? Would you pay 50% less for a car that doesn't start 5-10% of the time? Buy hamburger for 50% off that has a 5-10% chance of cooking up to taste horrible?

I really believe that you can learn enough to only buy Ruth autographs that fall in the 90% area. As Mark said, you won't get them for even 20% off.

[Runscott]

It is easy to get discouraged (Hauls of Shame) about some of the stuff that goes on in the hobby, and, without interaction, it is even easier to be cynical about motives by TPAs, auction houses, etc, who do have a lot of skin in the game. I'd like to think that carrying out this discussions allow the INDIVIDUALS a voice whcih, when compiled can be a greater voice. Thanks for taking te time to put thoughts. I may not agree with them all, but they are respected

Good points. The HOS articles about Ruth forgeries are very good, and well worth your time to read - Nash steals a lot of stuff from our forum, and also from discussions he has 1st or 2nd-hand with experts in the hobby, some of whom he credits, and others he doesn't, but he knows who is worth stealing from.

I don't know one way or the other if the two main TPA's are experts. The fact that they authenticate obvious forgeries makes me wonder; however, it could be that they are motivated by other things that end up masking their expertise. Regarding AH's that sell obvious forgeries, it is important to understand that they really can't auction expensive autographs that do not come with COA's - Lelands tried it for a while, and I bought most of my autographs from them back then, but most collectors require the security of a COA. Having said that, once an auction house chooses a TPA to be their authenticator, they have to go with the TPA's opinion. I have contacted a few of the large AH's when I was positive they were auctioning a forgery that had a PSA or JSA COA, but they felt that their hands were tied - they either accept everything the TPA tells them, or they fire them. Is their some collusion going on that fills the pockets of both? Probably. But it really comes down to collectors accepting the TPA's and paying for their pieces of paper.

Finally, compiled individual voices in this autograph sub-forum do not create a "greater voice" - it creates a compilation of voices of various knowledge levels, some that sound very confident and convincing, but shouldn't be.

[RichardSimon]

Scott,
It seems that based on their catalogs Lelands still does not use TPA's except for an occasional item which probably was submitted with the COA.
I know Mike and Josh and IMO they are better at authenticating then the TPA's.

[Pickles]

OK I am trying to create a signature and picture in order to minimize skepticism. bear with me as I work through the settings

I a also somewhat dyslexic when I type, and will reverse characters, and, coupled with a wireless kbd which is not always as quick as my fingers, you will find the occasional typo. Do not assume lack of education from the typos.

Back to the thread:

"Finally, compiled individual voices in this autograph sub-forum do not create a "greater voice" - it creates a compilation of voices of various knowledge levels, some that sound very confident and convincing, but shouldn't be."

Populist opinion is always valid, though not always right. Notice my "push" to get more technical facts on the auto as a way of having a more informed discussion. I am no competing with TPA's, nor want their business, but I do recognize that the public places a lot fo faith in them. I am not there on trusting them with 100's or 1000's of dollar investments, to be sure, but, they have become a necessary evil (savior?) of the hobby. Having said that, threat this thread as an alternate way of doing TPA, Take the Ted Williams auto in a thread Dec 25/26 2014. Not the most challenging forgery, but it saved someone (hopefully) $50 or so for a RT ticket to a TPA to get a rejection. I see value in this

[Runscott]

Scott,
It seems that based on their catalogs Lelands still does not use TPA's except for an occasional item which probably was submitted with the COA.
I know Mike and Josh and IMO they are better at authenticating then the TPA's.

Thanks for that correction, Richard. Someone told me a few auctions back that Lelands now used TPA's and the few I had read the detailed descriptions of had them. I agree - I have always enjoyed Lelands because Josh has a great selection, does whatever he wants, and has the expertise to do so. Speaking of, I just got my first hardcopy Lelands catalog in quite some time. Looking forward to perusing it over a bottle of Anchor Christmas...now.

[Runscott]

Populist opinion is always valid, though not always right. Notice my "push" to get more technical facts on the auto as a way of having a more informed discussion. I am no competing with TPA's, nor want their business, but I do recognize that the public places a lot fo faith in them. I am not there on trusting them with 100's or 1000's of dollar investments, to be sure, but, they have become a necessary evil (savior?) of the hobby. Having said that, threat this thread as an alternate way of doing TPA, Take the Ted Williams auto in a thread Dec 25/26 2014. Not the most challenging forgery, but it saved someone (hopefully) $50 or so for a RT ticket to a TPA to get a rejection. I see value in this

I think the above is spot-on. The technical facts are something that just takes time, as sharing them publicly is a double-edged sword. Plus, it's of value to figure some of it out on your own, both to yourself and to the hobby - by having a completely fresh outlook you could very well spot a new 'tell' that the experts never noticed.

[Pickles]

Regarding the double edged sword:

I suspect the "fear factor" is to "tip" a forgerer on how to make better forgeries. The other side is that one helps a lot of collectors in helping identify what is real. If someone goes into the forgery, they will likely do it with some help (it takes $ and some degree of sponsorship) and I suspect that if someone practices the forgeries to become an expert, he/she will study and develop their own techniques. On the other hand, the larger number of people which become educated and now have a better appreciation for what to look for in an authentic signature, I believe outweighs the negatives. no doubt there are pros and cons, but I am of the opinion that the pros outweigh the cons. Cardboard connection has some top level examples of what to look for on a Babe Ruth signature, bt this amounts to the tip of the tip of an iceberg, and, is perhaps the economic equivalent of "buy low- sell high" advice. Nonetheless, it is a start. I do hope that readers come to a similar conclusion and choose to share tips (not all of which are bound to be correct)

[Runscott]

Regarding the double edged sword:

I suspect the "fear factor" is to "tip" a forgerer on how to make better forgeries. The other side is that one helps a lot of collectors in helping identify what is real. If someone goes into the forgery, they will likely do it with some help (it takes $ and some degree of sponsorship) and I suspect that if someone practices the forgeries to become an expert, he/she will study and develop their own techniques. On the other hand, the larger number of people which become educated and now have a better appreciation for what to look for in an authentic signature, I believe outweighs the negatives. no doubt there are pros and cons, but I am of the opinion that the pros outweigh the cons. Cardboard connection has some top level examples of what to look for on a Babe Ruth signature, bt this amounts to the tip of the tip of an iceberg, and, is perhaps the economic equivalent of "buy low- sell high" advice. Nonetheless, it is a start. I do hope that readers come to a similar conclusion and choose to share tips (not all of which are bound to be correct)

This is not a new topic - it's not just about tipping off forgers. I have shared tips and had people who don't know their *sses from a hole in the ground tell me I'm incorrect. Experts with decades of experience have gone through the same thing here and have since backed off. Who can blame them?

[Pickles]

Well, so much for cooperative work. Can't help if others act that way. I got a bit of flack when I posted, but nothing I could not handle . I am not in it to criticize. Have done a lot of forensic/failure analysis career wise, so I tend to both be more technical and accept other points of view (an innacurate point can eventually be refuted)
I hope this thread can go deeper than that, but, your last 4 words are accurate. Oh well....

[Runscott]

As I said "this is not a new topic", meaning my response had nothing to do with your behavior in this thread. Good luck.