To Benjulmag
regarding your commnts that one is a '55 and one is a '57:
As I mentioned, I keep a database of rings and sadly I do not have a real '57 to compare to the Leland's ring. It is a well known fact among ring collectors that the balfour yankee rings from the 1950's changed very very little over the years, both on the winning rings and the losing rings. The coolest ring is the 1953 Yankee ring, when balfour put a big "5" on the rings to celebrate the Yankees 5th consecutive world series victory but that story is for another day. Other than '53 the Yankee rings rarely changed until the 70's.
The 1955 and 1957 tops should be identical. Not only that but why would Balfour as Fubar pointed out, go back to the drawing board and come up with a hat and stone design that was much more sloppy and poorly fitting than the ring they made 2 years earlier?
It's amazing how real championship rings always look much nicer in person than in photos. they tend to be magnificent. The ring on the right does not have that look - it is clearly a fake in my opinion. If you go back and look at Leland's auctions, this ring is usually auctioned off 1 or 2 times per auction. IN the current auction there are 2 of them. How in the world do these consigners get so many loser salesman samples, auction after auction?
Furthermore, if I had a babe ruth autograph and made a photo copy, would'nt the photocopy look "very similar to the real one?". So I don't think this is an issue that the Lelan's ring looks or does not look like the original, I beleive the bigger issue is that it is a fake and should be treated as a copy.
If anyone feels I am over-reaching, I would be happy to send you a pdf of Irv's Learner's newsletter. THis is the guy that restored that wagner that was just auctioned and he is the person who writes in his newsletter that he will make any Yankee ring. Furthermore, he constantly puts these rings on ebay.
|