And let's not forget Richard and his "tell."

(Which he conveniently won't tell anyone. Not H&S, not Jimmy Spence, not... )

+1 If the consignor's story is true (and his prompt responses to all questions in this thread lead me to believe it is) then I guess the only definitive proof that the auto is a fake would be if someone could produce an image of this exact ticket stub unsigned from an earlier auction or similar transaction.

Travis made fools of the people that believe it is not authentic. How did he do that by showing autographs side by side. Then stating and opinion. Like I said at the start. You either believe its authentic or not. No one on this site is a fool. The might be overly zealous but not fools.

Because the "evidence" that was supposed to be used to prove the ticket to be inauthentic was shown by Travis to be horsecrap and not related at all to the autograph on the ticket.

Its not an opinion to say that there are numerous differences between the ticket auto and the auto that was supposedly created by the same forger.

I know of very few people that even mentioned the second picture if any. I was only talking about the first Ruth on the ticket. Travis put the other one side by side. Does that make the people who might think the ticket is bad fools? Not only that if someone buys something and it is not authentic does that make them fools as well?

Your buddy Chris seems to think so, and has stated just that sentiment here, and on YouTube, many, many times.

The "evidence" that Chris had was bogus in the context in which it was shown. Travis pointed that out.

I think there's a difference between being a fool and being made a fool of, personally.

I think that was a foolish question.

Excellent question!

you're right. edited and sorry.

There certainly is.

Although sometimes--and this thread and its OP come to mind--one can be both.

This entire thread should be one of our autograph sub-forum 'exemplar threads'.

I am enjoying it, but it's definitely got all the characteristics that we are known for, plus some bonuses.

[QUOTE=jgmp123;1115528].My concern is the person that is going to pay through the nose for an item that may or may not be real.
That is it.

Your concern? Your concern? My concern is that I have put up a ticket for sale that I have had in my possession for over twenty years and based for some unknown reason I see I don't like it cause the corners are to crisp or there's a forger in Michigan that does work like this. Where is the proof? Where is the evidence? let me state some facts.
1) I have owned this ticket for over 20 years. I DEFY you to send me a photo of it on some other auction sight.
2) This ticket was never graded, looked at or appraised by psa in person (they could have gotten sent a photo). Anything body claiming anything else is not telling the truth
3) Heritage offered to auction this item for me. I have an email from Ron dated 1/7/13 three days after I contacted him and sent him photos of the stub. They at no time had this ticket in their possession.
4) I went with H&S because after speaking with both Ron and Josh on the phone I felt much better about using H&S.
5) The ticket has been certified twice and the auto certified twice.
6) I have been totally forthright in answering EVERY question even going so far as to allow my phone number to be given to the guy that started this thread. BTW STILL waiting to hear from him
7) no one has offered ANY proof that the ticket and auto aren't what H&S and I state they are

[QUOTE=rscheck;1115665]And the shameful part is that it might go for less money than it could have because of this thread...a thread I might add that was started by someone who won't call you, won't give H&S the reasons he believes it to be bad...looks nothing like the autograph that he states comes from the "Michigan Forger" and like Elvis has left the building.

[QUOTE=rscheck;1115665]+1,000

Apparently Chris has tucked his tail between his legs and went into hiding on this one. What a clusterf*** he made out of this, and as for credibility, he has lost a lot recently with his posts.

if someone thinks the autograph on the ticket is good or bad, thats their opinion.

chris mentioned the second picture, thats the point, where the heck is he?

He's out doin' his legwork.

You know, personally I am glad to see an AH come on here to defend themselves. Most of the times they don't, they probably think they have nothing to gain, and are probably right about that. Whatever they respond with, they usually get hit with more questions, technicalities, and complaints from a transaction gone bad with an individual 10 years ago.

Kit Young came on here to clarify some question years ago and was torched by a guy who had a bad transaction with him 20 years ago! Haven't heard from him since.

Troy from SACO was pounded mercilessly by folks when auctioning his CDV recently. He went WAY above and beyond in my opinion to answer questions, and for some, it just wasn't good enough.

I have never dealt with H&S, but everything I've heard about them has been positive.

It seems that emotions run so high that common sense and civility go out the window.

Now if the AH is screwing people and you can prove it (Mastro) go get 'em, just be able to prove it. I think a lot more AHs would post here if they didn't fear exactly what is happening to H&S here.

I applaud Troy for coming here and talking, but "it just wasn't good enough" ?!?

Troy did things his way, answered the questions he wanted to, and tried to play the victim when he was asked legitimate questions that exposed his lack of knowledge.

You might not realize this, but there were at least six board members participating in that SACO thread that each possessed at least ten times the knowledge of Troy regarding the mounted albumen photographs that he was trying to sell. Thus the questions that pained so many of you.

I agree with everything else you stated - well done, and I hope you understand that I wasn't attacking you for your opinion regarding SACO. Mounted albumens are something that I have expertise in. Many of the people reading that thread have little or no expertise in that area, and as a result, couldn't understand why we asked the questions we did. I completely get their attitude.

I just want to add one small thing about the seller has owned it for 20 years. It may seem like a long time ago but considering fakes have been around for many years, 20 years really isn't far.

Weren't most of the operation bullpen and other stuff in the early 90's. I have no idea whether its real or fake, just saying 20 years aint long.

I was giving this some thought as I was reading the thread, and it's entirely possible that this thread may actually help the final price (especially now considering how this thread has unfolded). It has definitely gotten some exposure, and the authenticity of the piece, while called into question, has only been solidified by the evidence presented here.

It will be interesting to see where this ends up.

We're a community of collectors talking about autographs - we come here to hear each others opinions, so if one of us is a potential bidder, there's no foul regardless of what's said.

If a potential bidder thinks there's something fishy about the autograph and googles 'Babe Ruth' + 'ticket' and locates this thread, there are far more people saying it's real (or discrediting Chris) than otherwise, plus the consignor and H&S are chiming in with good rebuttals. That can only help the price.

On the other hand, if Chris presents some solid evidence that proves it to be a fake, I'm sure H&S will pull it, so again - no foul.

$7k with 27+ hours to go! Congratulations rsheck! Not bad for a gift from a stranger you didn't know! :)

Twenty years is a long time, Brock, if the "Missouri forger," the alleged signer of this piece, wasn't working then. Do you know if he was?

I thought not.

Here's a tip: If you're going to open an item up to doubt, have some solid info to present. Don't take a leaf from Chris' book.

Heres a tip for you, actually read what i write considering I never said anything about the forger and how long he's been around. I simply stated when talking about a item being 70+ years old and only owning it for 20 years ain't much. So if I buy a item, I could tell people it has great provenience because I've owned it for X amount of years.

And like I posted I said I don't know whether its real or fake.

Yeah. That's the whole point.

+1

Ends today....

http://hugginsandscott.com/cgi-bin/s...l?itemid=55190

How about a gift from a nice woman that my dad knew. Thanks!

Taxes?ugh:rolleyes:

As a very wealthy person once told me, the more taxes I pay the better off I am. Personally, I wish I was paying 5m in taxes......

As for the ticket. Until irrefutable information comes out, which Chris seems to be withholding, the ticket and signature are good. As much as I am always in Chris's corner (hi Chris) I think this situation could have been handled better. At very minimum I would have hoped that Chris would have privately shared the smoking gun, if there is one, with H & S and the consignor.

I've gotten lost on this story. Someone is going to spend 7000+ on this autographed item. I enjoy Chris' videos and contributions, but unless there is DEFINITE PROOF that it is a fake, stub/autograph and all, then the usual "leap of faith" needs to be taken by the bidders. It really doesn't matter who the COA is from, etc. because ITS ALL OPINION, as none of us saw Babe sit down that day and sign that VERY ITEM.

I am not knowledgable like a lot of you guys, but to me, that looks like it could be close enough to a certain as can be Babe to allow a little variation, and it still be good.

"This situation could have been handled better"?

There should not have been a "situation"!

Chris hasn't "shared," because Chris has nothing to share.

(And yes, it's been obvious that you're "always in Chris's corner.'

Oh boy :D

Chris does more good stuff than you have enemies on the board. And that is saying something!!

Just because I don't care for the way this one thing has been handled doesn't mean I don't appreciate what Chris has done and does. I do, a lot.

Leon, you must have your cowboy boots on today. You sure are kicking a-s:D

:D:D

He's got you pretty well snookered, Leon!!
But I doubt he'll be doing much, anymore.

Hey, Rich. Have you shared that "tell" with H&S yet? It sure would be a shame if some collector inadvertently buys a $7k+ forgery, when a few words from you could prevent that.

Maybe he learned that you have to have proof first, and certainly proof you are willing to show.

Travis, you just dont know when to stop.:mad:

Why Shelly. Don't you think that single sentence of Travis's does a marvelous job of summing up this entire debacle of a thread?

Why can't everyone just DROP IT and let it play out?. I swear, a bunch of kids playing in a sandbox are more civil.

Drop this entire "situation" would be unfair to H&S, the consigner and potential buyer. What a mess this has become... very unfair to the 3 parties listed above. It really doesn't make ANYONE look good.

I am done.

+1

I do agree it is a mess to those three people. But people on here hiding stuff, like this is the veil of secrecy..Man...I'm not watching a James Bond flick, this stuff shouldn't happen.

I do hope it works out well for everyone tho. You can't help to feel that this is doing nothing but hurting the sale too, as others have said.

I'm sure the above was a 'tongue in cheek' comment. H&S pays the TPA's to do a job. They did the job (authenticating the item). Revealing a 'tell' wouldn't have any effect on the validity of the TPAs' assessment.

A 'tell' is a great thing to have, but it's still a matter of the TPA looking at a signature, comparing to exemplars, and making a decision. They did that. Perhaps they screwed up, but they did the job they were paid to do, and they were chosen to do it because H&S had faith in their work.

The only thing that will affect this is the legwork/research/whatever that Chris supposedly has in his back pocket, and which I'm guessing has to do with either the ticket or the provenance, since anything related to the signature would just be an opinion.

Consensus?
 

After havng gone through 37 pages of posts I am still seeking a consensus on the authenticity of the Ruth sig. I know that at least 2 people feel it is fake but I have lost count on the people who feel it is real. Am I correct in assuming that the consensus OPINION is that it is real?

Now for the fun. Assuming it is real what do people think it is worth and what it hammer down at?

No, Scott. It certainly was not "tongue in cheek."

Over and over, Rich proclaims himself to be a hobby "white knight," working tirelessly, and at much personal risk, to rid us of the forgers. He claims to have information, which, if shared with the TPAs that the major auction houses use, could all but insure the "Michigan forger" would no longer have his pieces authenticated and sold by those auction houses. Yet he keeps the information to himself.

There are two--and only two--possibilities. Either Rich has the info he alludes to, but, in not sharing with other professionals shows he is not the hero he claims to be, or, he has no information at all.

Now I'm lost. I thought it was 'Chris' and 'Michigan'. Now it's 'Rich' and 'Missouri'?

:confused: I hate being baffled. Going for another cup of coffee to clear my head.

Yeah, it's Michigan.

But both Chris and Richard seem to know who this "mystery forger" is, but neither are spilling the beans.

Ostensibly because they are afraid of some legal action.

They don't "seem to know." That would imply that they've shown some evidence. They say they know. Big difference.

And how could telling a fellow professional, "Look, if you see this characteristic (the famous "tell") in a Ruth signature, there's a pretty good chance it's bad," lead to legal action?

It would appear that if they just disclosed this "tell" to whomever, and not mention any names, there is absolutely no chance for litigation.

Simple enough, if true,

I don't get why you all are so hung up on this 'tell'. First of all, 'tells' aren't 100% conclusive - if they were, then someone would have revealed a 'tell' of Ruth himself, that would allow us to identify every single legitimate Ruth autograph.

Is everyone really failing to see that the 'tell' is not the issue here? :confused:

Do you all really think that Chris is that dumb? Seriously, I don't agree with all of his opinions, but he's a smart guy and he's always been very careful.

If one truly wants to rid the hobby of forgers--or do as much as one can towards that end--one shares information with fellow professionals.

Not to do so when one is continually bragging about his efforts to "clean up the hobby,' is nothing short of hypocritical.

Well put Scott.
And for those urging the tell to be revealed I have already explained my reasons for not revealing it. If that is not good enough well, then I am sorry but it is Chris' decision and my decision, for obvious reasons which have been explained already, why we do not think it should be revealed.
And Leon, thank you for the option we have to block posts we do not wish to waste our time on.

Your excuse is beginning to register on people's BS meters, Rich. It won't hold up forever.

Hi Rich,
It is our s/w that has the block feature. You can block everyone except moderators. You must listen to my drivel, I command you :). However, on a subject related note, I do have to agree with those (and even David) that have made the observation that, even if you and Chris won't tell what this secret mystery is to the general public, it would be nice if ya'll would tell the vested parties, H & S and the consignor...at least privately. If I knew an item was bad I couldn't live with myself letting someone get burnt. That's just me though....

And the consignor has been around and taking phone calls from several people on this thread (Still waiting for Chris).

i agree info should be shared.

if people aren't going to share a tell, then what good is a tell? If two people know and no one else is ever going to know. then any bad autographs can only be pulled on that persons word, not on the tell itself. They ain't sharing the tell, which means might as not be a tell at all (and there might not be one) and what good is the two people knowing the ' secret' tell?

people need proof, not ones word. if someone says "that's fake and only i know why", that's not good enough, people need proof.


He wasn't even telling H & S, so what good is it? In this hobby, in God we trust , the rest pay cash, either its cash on the barrellhead, show what you got, or forget it. Why even start a thread like this? looks like an ego play to be the vice president of the hobby in charge of forgeries. just dumb all the way around to do it like this. we need trasnparency and the sharing of information, not secret fraternal handshakes.

If I see a Babe Ruth autograph on Net54 with the tell, I will post the fact that the tell is present.

Oh boy!

What would H&S or the consignor do if they were told about the tell? Would it make a difference to them? No it would not.
I obey your commands Master Leon, I will always listen to you :D
And I have enjoyed your recent comments today :D. Well done, kudos to you sir.
I assume that David's posts of probable drivel and probable crap ( probably more than one of his posts, but I don't know since the block feature is so handy) have been hammering me. If so, everyone here knows him so who cares?

What's the point in blocking him if you're going to talk about him in every other post?

Also how can people sue if you post their name? I can understand if you come out and say John Doe is a forger and sells nothing but fakes. But if you just randomly post the name John Doe, then they can't do anything because you said nothing about them just posting a random name(sure tons of people are named John Doe). So if I find a post somewhere that has the name Brock Lewis, does that mean I could sue them also?

If it's 'Archive' Brock Lewis, sure.

I may be mistaken, but didnt you state that the Babe Ruth on the ticket had this so called "tell", and that is why you and Chris don't believe it to be real?

Well, if you did tell them then the onus would be on them. The way it is now, it is on you and Chris (imo). Many times I will do something that is probably futile so I can say that I did all I could do. I at least tried. Short of that then it falls back on me. And I don't want that ball in my court. Again, just my way of thinking....

If the consignor's story is true (I have no reason from what I have read so far to believe that is not the case) then the ticket and Ruth auto are real, period. This is supported by the authentication of both the ticket and auto twice by Spence and SGS.

On the other hand, both Richard and Chris are adamant that the auto (and perhaps also the ticket in Chris's case) is/are fake and, more specifically the work of a forger in Michigan that they know the name of as well as his specific "tells" when doing Ruth autos.

So, what is the truth? How can one determine which story/opinion is correct?
With the paucity of details coming from those who believe the auto and/or the ticket is/are not real, I for one tend to believe the consignor's story that both are authentic.

Perhaps more importantly, what have we learned from this thread? Certainly nothing to help anyone in their quest to be able to distinguish authentic Ruth autos from fakes. And the unwillingness of those that claim they have proof of some crook that sells Ruth forgeries to share that information with H&S or respected members of this forum in private communication, despite all the reasons for not doing so that have been posted, still seems to me to be a step backward for the Hobby and another slippery slide forward for the forgers.

The ticket and the picture posted by Chris (#68) do have the tell.

+1

This entire thing is BS. The auction ends tonight and nothing. If it ends this way, there is a whole lot of credibility that will be lost for a myriad of reasons.
I would be more worried about litigation with the consigner than a mystery forger in Iowa. One does not have to reveal a name to say why it is bad. “Tell” us why it is bad.
THIS is doing NOTHING positive for the hobby in ANY WAY if left open ended like this.
I hope something is shared.. and shared pronto. If nothing is shared, it is an injustice to the consigner, H&S, JSA, the potential buyer and this board. If there is nothing to tell and/or a mistake was made, that should be shared too.
This appears to be about Egos now and not for the greater good of the hobby. I guess I am not surprised.. just VERY disappointed on what this forum has become.

Let us be VERY CLEAR here. The item you are referring to is one that was posted by Mr. Williams and IS NO WAY associated with the autograph and ticket I am offering with H&S

Last time I post or reply in this thread:

Why is it that so many people on here are more than happy when they post an autograph and ask for an opinion from Chris or Richard about its authenticity and when they reply with Good or Bad, they are perfectly fine with that.....

But now they have no credibility:confused::confused::confused:

I believe he said the one posted by Chris(#68) and your ticket have teh same tell. Is that right Richard?

And the white knight facade crumbles a bit more.

That is correct.

Yes that is correct.