Quote:
Originally Posted by travrosty
it's not a valid argument, ball dating can only rule out an autograph, never rule one in. fake autographs may or may not be on period balls, but real ones have to be on period balls, they cannot be on out of period balls. so pointing to a period ball only says it is not a definite fake based only on the ball it is signed on, that is all it can say.
|
As I said, it is a weak and incomplete argument, but it is still an argument and relevant. Jim Stinson is here saying that it's the first thing he does. Heritage is saying that they've done it.
Further, there is more than simple ball dating going on here, which creates a stronger argument (still weak and incomplete, but a step in true autograph verification) and is quite interesting to me. I'm learning quite a bit from this "Platinum Night" auction, most of which Heritage probably didn't want me (or anyone else) to learn.