Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinte1941
I'd love to see the ball it's signed on.
It's a fabulous fake signature and anyone on this board would be hard pressed to say it was a fake if TTA wasn't mentioned.
|
jake, you hit it on the head.
that's why i say that even the biggest companies dont know what they are doing on ruth, becasue if this exact autograph had abc, or xyz authentication everyone would drool over it and wouldn't question it. no lie. and if someone questioned abc and xyz's expertise, the defenders would defend them to the death on this autograph if they said it was good.
their line is that its ALWAYS junk if it is tta (I won't defend them, it might be,) but on the other hand it is ALWAYS fabulous if it is abc or xyz. that's why the whole authentication game as it stands right now is junk, just look at all the ruths that abc and xyz cert and tell me that they are all good.
Ruth's siganture has been so corrupted it's almost impossible to tell anymore.
look at this ebay auction with certification and tell me a dime's worth of difference between the signatures on the two balls. if the psa one had been certed by tta, people would have feigned outrage over the 'crap' certed by tta. It's a game of names and trying to pump one up to increase value of LOA's in one's collection by never questioning them and bashing all the others.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/BABE-RUTH-AU...item19cff491e0
now here come all the babe ruth experts, let me have it!