opinion on these HOFers please
 

I am going through my duplicates and wanted your opinion on these before I decide what to do with them. Thanks so much Most of my autographs I am 100% comfortable with. These I have alittle hesitation. If anyone wants any, let me know
Attachment 305655

Attachment 305656

Attachment 305658

any help greatly appreciated

anyone?

ok davis not good , cronin not really , maybe good late sharpie but i wouldnt buy it , aaron maybe hard to see but looks similar to 70`s, the harridge and giles kinda weird one has a decent looking harridge the other decent giles , then each has what looks like a bad one , kinda rare to see those cards dual signed , i dont recall ever having one , kinda ask what came together?

I'm not a fan of that Cronin, and I think Kirk is spot on in his analysis of the Harridge and Giles cards. I'd pass.

Thanks Kirk. I think the Cronin and Aaron are good but not 100% +. I kind of agree with you on the Giles/harridge but hard to imagine why someone would forge one name especially Giles (in a flair pen). I have a 3rd one that is slabbed which I am attaching. To me these unslabbed ones look better than the slabbed especially the Harridge. What do you think? I want one for my collection. Can range from all good to all bad to all mixed so I am confusedAttachment 305847.

i really dont think the harridge on the right is good , the card on the left the giles is way closer with a harridge that looks good so card on the right wouldnt make it because it does appear harridge was added to me , the slabbed one giles is dead on but the harridge is just a bad looking signature i guess. real but just not pretty. you could submit the one on the left but beware the vintage stuff just gets failed now and i doubt it would pass psa anyway, i doubt they would pass the slabbed one again. not real consistent anymore

I had an auction house submit both Harridge/Giles cards. I tend to agree with your opinion though I do think the harridge you do not like could be good as I have seen some other late in life signatures of him like that but could be forged
These were submitted to PSA and JSA. One of the companies liked both Harridge but rejected both Giles, the other company said both Giles were good but rejected the Harridges. Jim Stinson agreed with us (one good and one bad on each card). This is what makes the hobby so frustrating. Thanks for your input. Any opinion on my 1936 Tigers scorecard in a separate post in this section?

maybe its just me but the scorecard has some concerns , maybe it is the pen used or something but quite alot arent typical signatures. simmons rowe goslin and few others. i look at something like that and at any given moment a signature gets off some, on a piece with multiple signatures not a big chance they are all off , if that makes sense. not sure what pen was used , fountain pen? which isnt so common on a game signed scorecard , most are pencil , but not impossible i suppose. some pieces i just say it may be good but it may not be me , your first impression is usually on. i would be interested to see what stinson says on this one

have never tried to upload anything i will give it a shot

here is the other part it is a similar a 1928 score card in pencil goslin again , moe berg sam rice ray schalk bucky harris . this was just laying on my desk , but 100% real see the difference in signatures? even ina rush they still hold the same characteristics as 3x5`s gpc etc, maybe one off but common, so is the pencil

Jim liked the scorecard tho was unsure on Simmons

yeah didnt like it or goslin and all in that pen makes it all or nothing kinda for me

JSA said Greenberg and Gehringer good. I have studied Greenberg autographs for sometime as I specialize in Jewish autos. I am 100% convinced on that one
http://loveofthegameauctions.com/193...-LOT13667.aspx
willing to sell for $150ppd

yep those are the 2 i thought good well greenberg for sure but what did jsa say on the rest

or you didnt mention it was already failed by jsa so for the most part i had the same opinion as jsa greenberg of course is real i m not so sure gehringer is though , funny when you post something like that or the cards nobody offers a opinion , now if it was trainwreck coaches corner there would have been 5 pages of i agrees

you know i did not see since it was another post where you asked if any were clubhouse thought it said are these real so sorry . but the term clubhouse sometimes gets tossed around loosely since end result is no good , my opinion is most likely a greenberg scorecard and somebody has added all the rest probably even gehringer, all same pen . later on

yeah- JSA said Greenberg, Gehringer good
Jim S said all except Simmons
If Rogell. Auker etc aren't real I am sure they weren't mailicious as who would add them to a real Greenberg?
I lean more to Jim S on this one but maybe since I own it I am not being objective.
Kind of weird- some of those cards I am tempted to try again through SGC or Beckett cause I feel they are real like the Aaron etc. It is like you said we all know the coaches corner stuff and there are experts on here for mantle Williams etc but then on some of the things I have posted now and in the past and others have posted too there are many opinion differences on their authenticity. That is to be expected. I do not know if I could pick out my own signature amongst 5 similar ones sincd 20 years ago
And sometimes I resubmit the same card to the same exact authenticator (not even the same company but the same person) and they give the opposite opinion they gave 6 months ago. I am not criticizing- just saying it is a non exact science. I don't bid on alot of slabbed stuff that looks off to me too. I wish there was a 100% sure method to know on the vintage stuff. Just wishful thinking

i would be comfortable sending the cronin and aaron for sure , but yes beckett? i think then it may pass as good , pretty consistent there. to me on the scorecard adding extras on was value if it was in hand i could get a better idea of the ink , i have seem some weird stuff especially with albums and team pages . it just to me as a clubhouse things fall into some common sense, not as many clubhouse from this era as later ruth gehrig but i dont recall simmons rowe and guys like that having somebody to get that close to a signature vs just having somebody work all of those on behind closed doors, and how often does a scorecard end up getting taken into a clubhouse, handed into a dugout maybe but it isnt a team ball , and in a dugout more than likely they just wouldnt sign it vs having somebody sign for them , i remember years ago spence was looking at a yankees team ball and said so and so is a clubhouse and combes is his wife. what was she doing in the clubhouse?

Simmons is terrible. Agreed, that score card is more trouble than it's worth. Leaning toward the rest being fine, but would like to have item in hand prior to saying more. Such an odd piece. The standard reasoning might suggest ink enhancement over original pencil signatures (that would really explain the awful Simmons), but that's not necessarily the case here. Regardless, impossible to give an accurate opinion based on such a scan.

Aaron is a very common vintage through the mail secretarial. I'm amazed nobody caught that.

Thanks. Not ink over pencil, checked carefully for that. There are 2 or possibly 3 different inks involved. Greenberg is a stand alone ink. The others are the same color but 2 distinct widths which could be 2 separate pens. My son was a clubbie for a few years and signed for a scrub player at times and we know how at times some players signed for others- could have been in the dugout, unlikely in the clubhouse. I like the piece with a vintage Greenberg for sure and the Yankee section has DiMaggio, Gehrig, Lazzeri listed in the lineup. Even though they all could be good except Simmons I will probably list as a Greenberg/gehrig signed item as the JSA will say. I am just trying to let go of items slightly outside my collecting parameters as this is plus duplicates as these cards are.
Thanks for all the time and help