Fresh collection, thoughts on authenticity?
 

A family friend's husband passed away this summer, and he was into collecting signed baseballs in the late-80's/early 90's. The family is looking for the best way to sell these, and I've suggested some auction houses. Before we go there, I'm wondering the board's thoughts on the authenticity of the bigger ones.

If they look good, I'll post some of the lesser HOFers.

Thanks,
Ken

Hope they have some kids that like to play baseball, cause that is about all those are good for.

Sorry, Ken, but you have some really bad stuff there.

The Billy Martin has a chance, but I don't like the others…

On the two Dimaggio's the bolder one the "gg" look off and the one with Mantle, while that one might look a little better the J in Joe bother's me. I've seen him sign balls in person and he always starts that J with such confidence. Also what's with leaving space for another signer on the ball? I always am suspect when two stars are on the sweet spot on a non-team ball unless they were done at the same time by request. The two different pens I think is intentional and don't like that Mantle at all with the big spacing in the M's.

The Yaz is a little too neat for me. He's normally a very sloppy signer. On the flip side the Koufax looks too neat, and too labored.

The Maris just strikes me as wrong…call it a "blink" moment.

The bottom line is, and it pains me to say it, is "what will PSA or JSA think". And to that I don't think any of those will pass save for possibly the Martin. It would be a big financial hit to send all those in and fail.

Just one man's opinion and looking forward to what others have to say.

PS. Forgot to mention, on Yaz, the couple I got in person when he was playing, the C completely encircles the "arl" in his first name.

Wow,that is some kind of bad.:eek:

Man such a bad time for the family already, and now they are going to find out that the autographs he left are worthless.

:(

it's rarely just one person
 

that suffers from fraud - rather it's the community in part and in whole........ I think that's why it's important to talk about it. Tragic.

Yes, very sad.

This is the real reason that fakes kill me. It hurts so much for a kid to go through his dad's or grampa's things like that... and then find out they were forgeries. It's bad enough to lose someone, then to find out they left their cherished collectibles:mad: to them and they are forgeries is like a second kick in the groin. pathetic.

I know it's probably extremely redundant for some of the experts on here to keep repeating why they think some sigs are forgeries, but it would definitely help out some of us who are not that keen on spotting the fakes. I've seen a ton of samples on this site that were labeled "bad" but they actually looked good to me. I trust the regulars' opinions on here, but would like to know why some are bad. Mantle, DiMaggio, Ted Williams....these are some that I have a tough time trying to decipher the good from the bad. The Mantle banana "M"s were mentioned many times, but I think his real "M"s kind of looked like bananas anyways.

Even though it may be a hassle to always repeat, it would definitely help some of us and it's a good thing to pass on your knowledge so that we can continue to discard the bad crap that's out there.

For example, why is the Williams in this post so bad? Personally, I did think it was a bit too neat/perfect, and written too linear...but can somebody point out the obvious aspects that make it forged?
:confused:

You just did. :D

I think the Billy Martin is authentic.