Grover Cleveland Alexander Autograph????

[yanks12025]

I bid on this baseball last week because it was a 1920s ball. It wasn't until after I won it, that I noticed the auto on the sweetspot is Glover Cleveland Alexander. After getting, it looks to be a 1926-28 cardinals ball based on Specs Toporcer and also Bob O'Farrell. I can't make out other autographs because they're pretty much faded away.

Now the Glover Cleveland Alexander autograph is still very bold. It compares to another one of his autos signed on a baseball.

So the big question is,

1.has the autograph been enhanced(i see no parts of a auto underneath)
2.is it a fake all together
3. it's original and stayed strong some how and it was ruined by water(ball looks to have water damage maybe causing the leather to rip)?????


thanks

[packs]

Hard to tell but might be enhanced. Here's one I used to own for comparison:

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m294/madjams/GLAlexander.jpg

[Klrdds]

From my viewpoint the signature looks "forced" and the slant of the G and C look off compared to the examples in my collection and other authentic examples. Also given the faded condition of the other signatures on the ball why does the Alexander look so bold and the ink line in his signature is thick and not matching the other ink flow thickness of the other signatures as far as I can tell.

[Duluth Eskimo]

I know exactly what you're saying, but when I initially saw the photo I didn't see anything with the signature itself that immediately jumped out at me as bad. We all know that different inks are affected differently over time. It is ironic that the GCA would survive better than others, but sometimes stars would be signing with a different pen than the rest of the team. It's easy to dismiss it, but it might be worth further examination. Might be hard to tell with the water damage though. Jason

[yanks12025]

One other thing. The auction house made no mention of the auto and it sold for only $25

[yanks12025]

Does anyone else have thoughts?