Little Red Riding Hood & Her Babe Ruth Signed 700th Homerun Day Ticket
 

This is the story of Little Red Riding Hood and the Babe Ruth 700th Homerun Day (July 13, 1934) autographed ticket.

Little Red Riding Hood is the name of the 5-12 year old (she was in her 70's according to the consignor in 1992) girl who went to the Tiger-Yankees game at Navin Field on July 13, 1934.

Why Little Red Riding Hood? Why not?

The consignor couldn’t remember her name (but did remember the story of the ticket in detail), so I’m giving her the name of Little Red Riding Hood.

So Little Red Riding Hood and her father went to the Detroit Tigers baseball game on July 13. 1934. They were seated in the upper deck of Navin Field holding a rain check ticket stamped July 13, 1934.

By the way, where are all of the other tickets from that day (July 13, 1934)? I have read there might be one other ticket from that day that has surfaced (but you would think such an historic baseball occasion would have had other tickets surface).

They watch the game (careful not to crease her ticket...geez, she probably kept it in a rigid toploader) and the ballgame finishes about two hours twelve minutes later.

Little Red Riding Hood and her father departs Navin Field and navigate approximately four miles to The Fisher Building.

But wait. What made Little Red Riding Hood and her father traverse to The Fisher Building immediately after the game? Was the radio interview with The Babe advertised somewhere? Where? Did the radio station invite the public into the interview?

So Little Red Riding Hood and her father have been holding on to their tickets for a few hours now. Was it their plan to have The Bambino autograph her ticket that day?

They arrive at the Fisher Building and find their way up to the radio station. And, of course, the radio station lets any member of the public right into the show, as I am sure they always did.

Little Red Riding Hood instantly recognizes Mrs. Ruth and sits down right next her?

So Little Red Riding Hood and her father walk into the radio station unabated?

No one else in that room recognized Mrs. Ruth? No one else in that room requested an autograph from Babe Ruth?

Wow, it was certainly a strange day for Little Red Riding Hood.


The Babe Ruth signed 700th Homerun Day Ticket sold for $12,000.00 over at Huggins & Scott.

Only $12,000 for a true 1/1 Babe Ruth item?

The Babe autographed thousands of baseballs, but that ticket is a true 1/1, is it not?

Where are all of the other tickets from that ballgame? Look at the ticket that Huggins & Scott sold. Not only did it survive in great condition, but it is signed by Babe Ruth?

The winner of that Babe Ruth signed ticket thinks they got a real bargain paying only $12,000.00 for a true 1/1.

It will surface again in the near future.

Here's the Babe Ruth signed ticket that sold over at Huggins & Scott:

Attachment 96750

Here's an Eddie Gaedel signature penned by the same person who penned the Babe Ruth signed ticket sold over at Huggins & Scott:

Attachment 96753

Here's an authentic Eddie Gaedel signature.

Attachment 96754

Chris, thanks for the helpful info. Nice use of comparisons and interesting take on the "story". I think there are a few parts of the story that are more believable than others, but taken as a whole leads to more than a few concerns.

I have to ask: why do you keep asking about the other tickets to this game? You seem to be implying that there is a conspiracy to hide the other tickets. What does the general lack of tickets to this game have to do with this particular ticket? I don't understand.

Chris, is this what you've been doing for the last several weeks? :confused:

• Stories change over the years, facts get forgotten or modified. A bad 79-yr old story means little. A good story wouldn't have meant much either.
• The two Gaedel signatures aren't even remotely similar. The Ruth looks at least close to a real Ruth. The example you have given isn't even credible.

Is it against the rules to ask you how you know the ticket and Gaedel forgery are signed by the same person? That's the only pertinent question in regards to this post

None of the fluff you wrote about the ticket and how it was reportedly signed even matters here. The provenance is hearsay, we know that. The consignor says the lady was in her 70's...she could have been older, do you know how old a lady is by looking at her? Ticket stubs can be rare as most people didn't keep them in the 1930s, even from historic games. The condition of the ticket stub is irrelevant.

Oh boy...and I thought I was in a for a non-eventful day...

I agree on all counts. Most of the OP is pretty meaningless. The part about the actual sig might end up being relevant...

this is exactly right, i will translate chris' post.

fluff,

here is a gaedel i believe to be signed by the same hand.

fluff.

i agree with slidekellyslide, is it illegal to ask how the ruth and gaedel are signed by the same person? that's all that matters. you dragged an auction house and two authentication companies into a mud pit because of ?

so you don't believe the backstory, so what? the backstory doesn't make the ticket real nor does it make it fake. you are short on facts and hard evidence so you belittle the backstory. the backstory means nothing to me, but evidence does. do you have any? When someone spends that much time making fun of the backstory, means they got what? for proof? If you had some, you wouldn't even bother mentioning the backstory, as PROOF trumps all.

Look at the "a" in Babe, and the "g" in Gaedel. Also, look at the "u" in Ruth and the first "w" in Edward. They do look very close. Is that enough?

If this is your "proof", it is not convincing in the least.

Every single occurrence, when looked at individually, is highly unlikely.

Consider the chain of events that had to occur in order to bring your parents together. One improbability after another.

And yet, we're all here.

(One of us, though, as my father used to say, is ''not all there.")

We still have assertions presented as fact (Ruth = Gaedel). Absent supporting proof we're really still @ he said/she said IMO.

why doesnt chris prove that the ruth signed ticket and the gaedel and the other ruth he showed are by the same hand. can you elaborate, mr. chris?

Aside from the autograph, I think Chris is expressing doubt here, that this ticket is even from the correct game, because the only thing signifying the game is a date stamp.

There's also a Ted Williams 500 HR Rain Check Stub in the same auction with a hand-applied date stamp.

Maybe the ticket guys can chime in here, but I handled a large collection of baseball and other sports tickets a couple years ago and did not find a single rain check stub that was hand date-stamped.

There aren't press photos, I don't think it was common practice to hand-stamp the dates of this portion of the ticket at games. Somebody feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

I also have a question. Did the Tigers change there rain check tickets every year. Or did they just stamp the same kind of ticket?

Regarding the radio show, many shows had a live audience (often behind glass, so you couldn't hear them over the air.) Tickets to these would be given out beforehand, usually for free.

So a family is going to the big city to see a radio show, because they have tickets. While there, why not take in a baseball game? While at the station, who do we see, but Babe Ruth! And he's signing autographs for the crowd afterwards!! "Daddy, can I get his autograph? Sure, honey, but I don't have anything -- wait, have him sign my ticket stub."

Chris, I make no assertions about the whole of your post, but I think the scenario I just posted is extremely plausible. Once again, you have made a post with lots of sizzle and no steak. I look forward to you coming on again two weeks from now to clear this up a little.

Ken

Shelly,
The "Babe Ruth signed 700 HR ticket" most likely had the year 1934 printed (not stamped) in the disclaimer text at the bottom of the stub, which was the way Tigers tickets were printed in the mid-late 1930's. The auction of similar 1934 tickets that Lance Fittro posted in the original thread clearly showed this.

As I stated before, it was unusual for Detroit to stamp the date of games on Emergency tickets in the earlier years, FWIW.

Scott, I dont think it did. I think this was a generic ticket with no year or date. It was then stamped. I could be wrong but when I looked there was no year on the ticket that I could see.Attachment 96765

I agree with those that have posted regarding the relative weight of the story. Details of what a "70" year old person recounts as well as the consignor's recollection of what she said should not be taken as foolproof and by themselves, do little one way or the other in determining authenticity of either the ticket or the auto.

In addition, I see little, if any, similarities in letter formation or pressure points between the "a" in Babe and the "g" in Gaedel. The same goes for the "u" in Ruth and the first "w" in Edward. Certainly nothing strong enough to lead me to think they were both done by the same hand.

So, I go back to what I said in the original "Ruth" thread and that is what exactly is the purpose of these "cryptic" posts? Where is the new information/evidence?

Once again we have a thread started with no proof of anything and a thread starter who is unwilling to give whatever "proof" he may have. Throwing all of that irrelevant stuff into his post makes me believe he has nothing. Chris has lost a ton of credibility over this ticket.

Mr. Williams,

This is what you said:


I am disappointed that Spence certed that.

If I recall correctly, PSA rejected that Babe Ruth awhile back.

It's not authentic.


And this is your proof?

This is the story of Little Red Riding Hood and the Babe Ruth 700th Homerun Day (July 13, 1934) autographed ticket.

Little Red Riding Hood is the name of the 5-12 year old (she was in her 70's according to the consignor in 1992) girl who went to the Tiger-Yankees game at Navin Field on July 13, 1934.

Why Little Red Riding Hood? Why not?

The consignor couldn’t remember her name (but did remember the story of the ticket in detail), so I’m giving her the name of Little Red Riding Hood.

So Little Red Riding Hood and her father went to the Detroit Tigers baseball game on July 13. 1934. They were seated in the upper deck of Navin Field holding a rain check ticket stamped July 13, 1934.

By the way, where are all of the other tickets from that day (July 13, 1934)? I have read there might be one other ticket from that day that has surfaced (but you would think such an historic baseball occasion would have had other tickets surface).

They watch the game (careful not to crease her ticket...geez, she probably kept it in a rigid toploader) and the ballgame finishes about two hours twelve minutes later.

Little Red Riding Hood and her father departs Navin Field and navigate approximately four miles to The Fisher Building.

But wait. What made Little Red Riding Hood and her father traverse to The Fisher Building immediately after the game? Was the radio interview with The Babe advertised somewhere? Where? Did the radio station invite the public into the interview?

So Little Red Riding Hood and her father have been holding on to their tickets for a few hours now. Was it their plan to have The Bambino autograph her ticket that day?

They arrive at the Fisher Building and find their way up to the radio station. And, of course, the radio station lets any member of the public right into the show, as I am sure they always did.

Little Red Riding Hood instantly recognizes Mrs. Ruth and sits down right next her?

So Little Red Riding Hood and her father walk into the radio station unabated?

No one else in that room recognized Mrs. Ruth? No one else in that room requested an autograph from Babe Ruth?

Wow, it was certainly a strange day for Little Red Riding Hood.


The Babe Ruth signed 700th Homerun Day Ticket sold for $12,000.00 over at Huggins & Scott.

Only $12,000 for a true 1/1 Babe Ruth item?

The Babe autographed thousands of baseballs, but that ticket is a true 1/1, is it not?

Where are all of the other tickets from that ballgame? Look at the ticket that Huggins & Scott sold. Not only did it survive in great condition, but it is signed by Babe Ruth?

The winner of that Babe Ruth signed ticket thinks they got a real bargain paying only $12,000.00 for a true 1/1.

It will surface again in the near future.



I am not an autograph collector but I have followed this thread with interest. I was really hoping you would come back with something credible. The above story is ....a story. Smoke, mirrors and deflection. Anyone can see that. I mean, you called out an Auction House, and an Authenticator, and now the consignor with a story about little red riding hood. Again, that's all you got?

Not that it matters, but why should I, and others, believe anything you say from now on?

I don't have a dog in this fight, I don't know H&S or anyone else in this thread. Just one guys opinion.

Dan, coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.

To get back to your first post.

First, Dan, what did I have to gain by posting my original Babe Ruth Ticket thread?

I knew I'd be criticized, trashed and called names (none of you disappointed me).

I've been accumulating information for years, Dan. It's what I do. I know the forger's work. I possess numerous other Babe Ruth penned items from the same forger. I know his work.

Dan, aren’t there collectors on the card side who can look at a card and immediately know whether it’s been altered, trimmed, etc?

Many of you here make fun of my "autograph eye."

I didn't see anyone here make fun of David's "autograph eye" when he called that autograph book good.

But yet, many of you seem to get a kick out of making fun of me.

Again, Dan, I will ask you, what did I have to gain by posting my original Babe Ruth Ticket thread?

Attention.

Yes, I am disappointed that Spence certed that Ruth.

He should know better.

I went back a long way on Net54 and I was reading the praises of David's original "1927 Yankees" baseball. None of you even hinted it was bad. I know it wasn't authentic as soon as I received David's photographs.

All of have every right to criticize, question and call me names (if that makes you feel better).

98% of you don't have a clue about The Babe's autograph. It shows.

Some of you enjoy making fun of my autograph eye. Well, if that makes you feel better, too, then continue on.

As far as losing my credibility here on Net54; well, wow. Now I'm going to lose sleep, too.

I will ask all of you once again, "What did I have to gain by posting my original Babe Ruth thread and this one?"

Tell me.

Shelly,
Thanks for the close up scan.
The stub's tear is conveniently just above where the year 1934 would have appeared on the stub. To see an example of what I am talking about please refer to the Tigers 1934 eBay auction lot in the 1st Babe Ruth ticket thread.

That is why I wonder if this ticket that you see can be from other years or was this generic ticket used for only 1934?

98% of you don't have a clue about The Babe's autograph. It shows.

OMG. How humble.

I'll tell you. Once again.

Attention.

He overplayed his hand on what he thought his name was worth in the "trust me" dept. and don't ask me any questions because I am better than 98% of you.

You want all of us to bow down to your "autograph eye" I guess...I don't know. You've still not shared one single bit of proof. NOT ONE. You don't even answer direct questions. You ran and hid for nearly two weeks when the heat was on....I think it's pretty obvious that you've damaged your reputation.

Ticket stub again.


Attachment 96772

Usually when I read threads that are "battling" over disputed autographs, I usually fall on Chris's side of the ledger. I have no opinion on this particular ticket, as I have zero experience in dealing with ticket stubs from that era, nor do I profess to know that particular style of Ruth's (or a forgers) signature. However, I do get quite disgusted with people continuing to rub David's face into the mistake he made over his forged '27 Yankees baseball. I find it to be contemptable, unprofessional, disconcerting, malicious, heartless, demeaning, and otherwise uncalled for. When trying to justify or prove themselves, one should tout their own resume, rather than belittling someone elses. It doesn't really matter who has the biggest penis amongst competitors, what matters is if it's big enough or swung well enough to get the job done.

Shelly,
What I am trying to say is the ticket (that is deemed to be Ruth's 700th HR game) WOULD HAVE a year printed on it had the tear conveniently not been applied on the stub where it was.

Ironic? Yes.
Does this absolutely prove anything? Nope.

I know boxing autographs quite well, but I would never put a % on the people I felt I knew boxing autographs better than. that's arrogance.

And when I do notice an auction item that isn't right, and wish to call it out. I show all the proof I have, every bit, totally transparent. I don't just say that I am Travis R. so that should be good enough for you 98% that don't know jack about it. (that's not my attitude about it but some here have that attitude.)

I asked for his hobby resume on vintage baseball before on a thread and never got a response. If he is top 2% on Ruth, it should be fantasic hobby resume on vintage baseball. I will be happy to provide my resume on boxing to anyone that asks so I can't be called a hypocrite.

What Chris is trying to point out is that the ticket itself is not conclusively a ticket from 7/13/34. The inference is that because "Babe's" sig has been applied, it must be from his 700th career HR even though there is no year present.

FWIW, as I have stated from the beginning, I am not 100% comfortable that this ticket is from 7/13/34. The ticket in of itself does not stand on its own. It all boils down to the credibility of the actual Babe Ruth sig. Here is where people don't appear to agree.

I too would love to see the proof that refutes the authenticity of the Ruth sig.

That is why I asked if this type of ticket was used just for the 34 season or could it have been used in other years.

but it's not conclusively NOT a ticket from 1934 either, so likw you said, that doesnt make the signature good or bad.


I did ask chris once for his opinion on a joe dimaggio autographed baseball that an antique shop had for sale in my area once, and for the record, he said no good. i didnt buy it because i dont know dimaggio. chris knows dimaggio, and ruth and cy young, and all the rest.

my favorite story on a thread about cy young.

baseball expert comes on and says that cy young couldnt have possibly signed the ball, because the ball was manufactured after young had died.

soon after, mr. chris comes on and says 'look at that horrible piece of junk'. This thread is getting to be a parody of itself. Why start it if no evidence is shown and just to stir up a hornets you know what nest?

[QUOTE=travrosty;1121067]but it's not conclusively NOT a ticket from 1934 either, so likw you said, that doesnt make the signature good or bad.


Travis,
That is correct.

And here we still are with no evidence of fraud....NONE. All we have is an autograph eye that claims to be better than 98% of us. So I guess we should all just shut up unless we're in the 2%.

I'm clearly not part of the long debate between Chris and other members of this forum. Nor am I by any means an authority on any autograph. But having followed the original Ruth thread and this one, I believe a much more relevant question would be " What did we gain by your posting of the original Babe Ruth thread and this one?" To date, in my humble opinion, not much.

A confirmed 700 HR Ruth ticket I imagine would bring a couple grand on it's own, so I think that's a bit relevant in this situation in what is being offered here. Authenticity of signature aside, It's more then just a Babe Ruth signature on the back of any random ticket.

Same issue with the Un-Autographed Ted Williams 500HR ticket offered right next to it in the same auction. Even if the ticket style matches up with the right year it's still a quite a stretch to assume they are from the correct game.

Who date-stamped these tickets and when?

Should just go back to posting videos about Coach's Corner. At least there the things were obvious to us 98 percenters.

As for the rest of his posts....reminds me of that old song from the 70s........Poor, Poor, Pitiful Me.

The thing about it is, all we got is attitude from the original poster, and all have asked from day 1 is some proof. that's what it boils down to.

Chis, less than a year ago you posted this in another thread. Has something since changed?

What I find truly amazing is that the so called TPA's haters are now defending them. What made this happen?

No, Phil, nothing has changed. I have never claimed to be an expert. I have claimed to be very knowledeable about autographs.

Who on this board would you consider an expert?

no one is defending the tpa's . i said i didnt know if it was good or bad, or if spence screwed up or not, just that if you are going to call out spence, have some proof. chris might end up being right, but not just because his name is christopher williams.

Shelly,

Nobody is defending the TPAs. What seems to be the general thing here is for Chris to either put up or shut up. It has been over three weeks and still nothing.

Thanks, that is an honest reply.:)

here is a couple of emergency stamped tickets from 1934 july12, that went with this lot.

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedi...b#.UXRqAkbfjU4

Travis, two of the rain checks have a printed date the other two have stamped dates. My question was. Are the generic tickets from that year only or could they have been from other years as well. I dont care what the stamp says.

i posted it for discussion purposes, i am not a ticket guy.

but they seem to match form, so i would think someone would have a hard time CONCLUSIVELY debunking the ticket from the way it looks based on these others that have surfaced. unless they are fake too? not likely.

whether or not the ticket can be definitely ruled in is up to debate, but conversely, it would be hard to DEFINITELY rule it out either. they do look the same.

did chris have any ticket bombshell he wanted to show?

If he did I am sure it would have been done by now. I am just curious how they can say it was that date.

What's the distinction?

Other than the couple of guys on here who are long time dealers I don't profess to know the credentials of the rest.

Who are you referring to?

Originally Posted by Scott Garner
James and all,
Interesting...

FWIW, I would not trust this to be a real Ruth 700th HR ticket.

I personally have not seen vintage Tigers tickets that have been stamped with a date. In fact, as a baseball ticket collector of over 40 years, I will tell you that I do not recall EVER seeing a Tigers stamped date ticket prior to 1969. I have, however, seen lots of emergency tickets like the one featured in this auction with designations like Game X, Game K, etc.

I do recall seeing a genuine printed date ticket to Ruth's 700th HR. At least one exists in the hobby. As I recall it has an uneven tear at the perforation, almost appearing to have a "fang" shaped tear....

(chris williams response)
+1 and more......


shelly, i post that photo (that huggins and scott posted in the last thread) because someone said they doubt these stamped tickets exist, and chris +1 them, agreed with them.

well here are two stamped emergency tickets from the day before, july 12, 1934. now unless people think those are fake, then there is precedent for stamped emergency tickets from july, 1934 out there. why did chris do a +1?

because the year is cut off, it isnt possible to confirm it is from 1934, but not possible to confirm it isn't either. but it can put to rest the theory that the 700 hr ticket must be a fake because no one has seen stamping like that before. it could be real. but game used balls same way, no one can prove that they were used in the game for sure, but if they fit the pattern and form of game used balls from that game, you have to have a leap of faith somewhat. The stamped huggins and scott ticket does follow form for what it shows people. you have to then go on to the autograph.

for the auction house to say it is from 1934 is them saying it's from 1934. it probably is, the consignor says it is, not 100% definitely yet as far as i can tell. but we have seen auction houses say this is babe ruth's first home run bat, and another one says they have the first homerun bat. the ticket cant disprove the autograph or backstory, but the autograph can disprove everything.

it comes down to the autograph.

To whom are you referring? ;)

the distinction between expert and very knowledgable about autographs is that if someone has someone else right where they want them and want to go in for the kill, they are an expert, if they screwed up and have some backtracking to do, they are very knowledgable about autographs.

can i get a +1 ?

I've asked you two questions (one in this thread and one on the other) which you haven't answered yet. Give me the courtesy of answers and ill be happy to do the same.

1. I don't like the word expert.

2. What has changed from last year is that I am more knowledgeable about autographs than I was a year ago.

As a matter of fact, I am more knowledgeable about autographs than I was a week ago.

I can't speak for anyone else who has gotten bogged down in two threads, but with all the time I've spent reading this, I feel I'm dumber than I was three weeks ago.

Ken

My main question centers around the ticket authenticity. It has struck me that the the ticket was cut. It certainly did not enhance the presentation of the autograph. What it did do was cut off very critical pieces of evidence toward dating it.
Notice the precision of the stamping of the other examples. I wonder if anyone could duplicate that freehand on two consecutive tickets while doing presumably hundreds? But look closely at Seat 26. Does it not appear that it was stamped after tearing? Could that be why the ticket was trimmed?

I want to add that I believe that Chris made a premature call on this because he felt his hand was forced due to the time-sensitive nature of the situation. I don't believe he has all of the pieces of the puzzle that many are demanding, and very likely now, never will. But my guess is he will keep trying.

Without any financial gain, I doubt many of us would do the same.

It seems to me, from the enlargement, that it was torn after it was stamped.

+1

I am sure this has been pointed out between the two threads at some point, but notice that the only other Emergency ticket (not to mention stamped) was for the same Tigers-Yankees series opener when Mr. Ruth entered the series sitting on 699 for his career.

Difference is Set Z in H&S, Set A in the sold lot. Perhaps a darker ticket in H&S as well?

Scott, if it was torn after it was stamped what is the real date. Not one person has answered if this was a ticket that could have been from 1933,34.35. The stamp is something that I remembe as a kid. You can place what ever date you wanted. Is that stub from 1934. If it is the only question left is the autograph authentic.

Man, I have it on my screen and it appears pretty clear that the 4 is complete and the tear (flaking?) extends beneath the stamp. I can't seem to save my enlargement to post it here. Maybe someone else can?

It is very clear that the stamp does not extend over the tear.

FYI, not sure if anyone can do anything with this or not, but here's another 1934 example. Both 1.27 + .13 tax for a total of $1.40. Perhaps this may be a different price in other seasons?

http://i.ebayimg.com/t/1934-Red-Sox-...NY-!~~60_3.JPG

I don't know why Chris, but your intent is not enough. I think you do have a great eye, but everyone is wrong sometimes, no? You haven't givn us any reason to think that now isn't one of those times for you.

I have never had any reason to have anything but respect for you and your posts on these boards, and that really hasn't changed. I'm not calling you names, and will read what you post with the same interest that i always have. But I can tell you this: if you are hit by a car and killed tomorrow (and I sincerely hope that doesn't happen and that you live as long as you hope to), than this Ruth will be accepted by 100 percent of us, as we don't have your eye. And then it will be real. See what I mean?

So if you have something else to share, please do, but otherwise this ticket is likely to sell for even more than it did this time when it comes up for auction again.

I can't say it much nicer than this.

No reason why it shouldn't, Wayne.

Indeed. I wish I owned it.

Let me ask any one on this board a simple question. If the stamp was not on the ticket. How would you know its from 1934? This a generic ticket. Did the Tigers use this ticket in any year but 1934? If was made just for the 34 season then it is all about the autograph. If not, it does open a can of worms.
I am not trying to do anyting but find out the true facts about this ticket not the autograph.

Shelly,

I don't know how many different ways I can answer this. The ticket does not say that it is from 1934. It is definitely from this era as we have seen other exemplars that show this.

There is nothing that 100% refutes that this ticket couldn't POSSIBLY be from the game played on July 13, 1934.

As a ticket collector, I can tell you that there are examples of other baseball ticket stock that a printed (not stamped) year is nowhere to be seen on the ticket. The Cleveland Indians did this for many years. However, there was one huge difference between these tickets and the Ruth signed "700th HR" ticket. The Indians tickets included the day of the week (Monday, Tuesday, etc.) At least these provided you with an additional clue to help you match it up with the corresponding year. The Detroit ticket does not allow you this luxury. It becomes much more of a leap of faith.

Without the autograph being legit, the ticket would have minimal value because of the absence of the year and the possibility of it being, from say, 1933 or 1935. Some collectors may have some possible interest, but many would not, FWIW...

Anyone have another Tigers ticket from 1933 or 1935 to compare? Matt showed another from 1934 which had the same base price and tax. I can't quite make out the details on the 1930's ticket lot that has been posted, which included years other than 1934, but even with all the squinting I've done looking at the low-res image that Worthpoint retains, it looks to me like only 1934 tickets were pictured in that one shot.

Promise this is the last question. Could that ticket without a stamp on it be from another year other than 1934, Scott yes or no. Any one else yes or no. If no that is it. No or yes nothing more.
I am now beeing mean and nasty.:eek: I am also very tired. At my age the only thing you have to remember is the seat up or down. You guys have no idea how many times I called for help:rolleyes:

Well, if the date stamp is authentic, they were on the road in 1932, 1933, 1935 and 1936 on that date.

Found a few others. These are (in order) from 1932, 1933 (lower right ticket in the group), 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943. To based on the price, 1937 is out. 1932 looks to be a different style of ticket (horizontal orientation rather than vertical), though the one I show is not an "emergency ticket," so would it be possible for those to have a different layout? I'm not sure, but even so, that leaves a possibility of 1933-36, 1938-41, and 1943 based just on the price. (I couldn't find an example for 1942). And to my eye, the "style" of ticket is very similar from 1933-43, so I could easily see them using the same "emergency tickets" for multiple years (ruling out 1937 and 1942 due to price differences). Did they actually do this? I have no idea. I'm just trying to help cover all the bases in what way I can.

Thanks Travis. Looks like the ones shown that are stamp dated were the day right before Ruth's 700th HR.

My theory is that the Tigers had to print up extra tickets for that series in expectation of higher crowds due to the possibility that Ruth would get #700.