Did I buy a Fake Marquard Signed T206?
 

Hey Fellas!

need some help. I am working on a Marquard back run and have the cards displayed nicely on my office wall in a frame. I thought a signed T206 would be an awesome addition to the run with the auto being the center piece.

I paid up ($1500) for a real nice dark signed T206 in the last Clean Sweep auction. has a LOA from JSA (picture below) so I bid up on it. Card came here with the LOA, I turned around and dropped another $150 with shipping to SGC to get the card slabbed. I also figured what the hell... get the sig authenticated, card graded and slab it up so I can add it to the wall frame....

I added a copy of the JSA LOA with the order form, and specifially wrote on the form "PLEASE ENCAPSULATE!"

Card came back the same way I sent it raw and add insult to injury, described as "not a genuine example."

reasons stated:

*sizing of letters inconsistent
*letter shape and or formation irregular
*drawn slowly with hesitation and/or pen lifts...

OUCH!

I know there are some T206 signed marquard experts out there. what do you think. If I want is slabbed should I send it to PSA for the tie breaker?

Help!

Thanks!!

Clifford Franklin


Attachment 335291

Attachment 335292

Attachment 335293

Attachment 335294

Marquard
 

Looks good to me

Unfortunately, autograph authentication is not an exact science. A board members with far more knowledge i'm sure will chime in, but in the mean time, have a look at this site for comparisons: http://www.signedt206.com/how-many-s...arquards-exist

I am no expert in this area. I will say I bid on this card as well but just couldn't bid it up too much because I just didn't have a good feeling about the authenticity. That sure stinks. I hope it plays out ok for you on the end.

It looks close, but something just looks off to me. I'd try at Beckett or PSA, or just be happy with the JSA letter. I had a bunch of Clean Sweep cards fail from a large lot and they told me "I hope the rest of the cards make up for it"

Cliff,

What's unfortunate is that one TPAuth said "ok" another said "not ok". Unfortunately, if you ever want to sell it then the right thing would be to disclose what was told to you by both.

Spence is supposed to be an authority on autos but I'd venture to guess he's made the wrong assessment (good auto but would not authenticate or authenticated a bogus auto) a few times. Since it's a Spence cert, some people may swear by it.

Looking at it, I wouldn't want to make a decision on it. Personally, I'd rather have a T206 signed with a fountain pen.

What truly sucks is that you now own it and may never get the full enjoyment out of it because one TPAuth said they wouldn't cert it (even though it could be authentic).

I'd see if Spence uses a TPAuth that encapsulates because if that company won't cert/encapsulate it, then that would be very odd.

Good luck - and again, this really sucks because now you'll forever be doubting something that you really thought was special.

I found another card, auctioned off in 2017 at Sig auctions, with the signature in almost exactly the same spot, with the same angle and starting/ending position. Very suspicious. Take a look: http://auction.sigauctions.com/rube_...-lot62562.aspx.

Looks spot on to me

Yes, literally spot on.

Didn't see your original post of the other card but I still believe it's authentic and a great example.

Too weird of a coincidence for me.

From this gallery, I can see that Marquard started his signatures at random places. Never on the same spot. http://www.signedt206.com/how-many-s...rquards-exist/

I could maybe live with it if the pen was the same, but two different types of pens indicate two different signings at different times. Very unlikely that he starts the signature on the same exact spot and on the same exact angle.

Did I buy a Fake Marquard Signed T206?
 

He basically had 3 different autograph spots on his T cards. Rube stacked over Marquard, fitting the whole signature horizontally and then at that steep angle. Sometimes rarely vertically. A lot of his signatures posted on Paul's site show this and the ones I have owned as well.

T206
 

Seems like an awful lot of money spent on something like that. .and not getting the satisfaction you want

This is why autograph authentication is such a metaphysical concept, rooted in idealism.

No one witnessed Marquard sign that card. At this point, the only thing that matters is that you think it's real. If you think it's real, then it's real.

Nothing will ever be certain when it comes to that signature.

You could make the same argument for every autograph ever signed that you don't know the authenticity unless you witness it signed yourself. With that said, there are many many techniques to prove an autograph authentic.

No, the same argument can't be made for mediums like legal contracts and checks, where the cost of recreating it by means of forgery would far outweigh the financial benefit to be gained by selling it as authentic.

It boils down to cost/benefit analysis and that Rube Marquard card, in that condition, has very little cost, and a lot of economic benefit if someone can place a signature on it. It's not a particularly hard signature to forge either, especially with a thick felt tipped pen.

Just something to think about.

Yes, it can. I've seen fake signed checks, I'm sure you have as well. I don't consider a legal document to be an autograph in my opinion. True, but unless you recreate an historically rare signature that's a different story.

If that were the case, why don't we see more signed T206 cards? A signed Larry Doyle just sold for $800 or so and it's probably a $5-$15 card raw. Why don't people buy them up and place a signature on it, his is easy as well.

His signature may not be hard to forge but he has some tells with his signature.

Trust me, I think about it all the time unfortunately lol.

In the end I think it's good and looks just like the ones I've owned and many I've seen. I have had Mike Trout autographs I got signed in person myself that have both passed and failed authenticity. Like you said, boils down to if YOU believe it's authentic or not.

I had a feeling the card was signed recently, so I went on Worthpoint and found this on page 6.

I think this pretty much means case closed.

The signature is fake.

Embarrassing gaffe for JSA.

Did I buy a Fake Marquard Signed T206?
 

Damn good research. Makes me question mine now unfortunately. When did the card sell on Worth Point out of curiosity since it's in a new holder.

This could get traced back to the forger...

Larger images for reference...

Wow. Good catch.

Feb 7, 2018.

Link here: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthoped...ube-1913448029

I don't check pop reports much but is there a way to check submission dates for the serial numbers on the case?

Nice research, well done. Unfortunate for the OP though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's why I love this site, so much can be uncovered. I wonder if the AH would take a refund or a credit. Wonder what Spence will think about this...

Wow is that great research!!

I would reach back to both with some questions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Awesome research, I would definitely be reaching out to both demanding a refund.

As an FYI, from CS website: "Unless noted, Clean Sweep Auctions only sells original items. We completely stand behind the authenticity of every item we sell. We will provide Letters of Authenticity from Clean Sweep Auctions upon request for all autographed items priced at $30 or more. Clean Sweep Auctions uses among the strictest standards in the industry."

Let us know how things turn out.

Wow, I hate to go against a professional, but this really takes the cake.

Always err on the side of caution. I'm the only one who sees at least 2 stops and starts ?

That is not very long ago that PSA card sold. When was the auction start/finish date on the autoed card. Couldn't have been too far apart from purchase to consignment.

Wow, CSI: Card Scene Investigation.

closed Oct 11, 2018 - Lot 319 https://www.cleansweepauctions.com/i...tem=0000616093

The good news is that Cliff should be able to get a refund.


That was a fine piece of investigative work. My hats off to you. This makes Spence look a bit foolish. Copy that cert! There should be a "Hall of Shame" page for TPGs and TPAuth that don't quite get things right.

The forger should be prosecuted

Please keep us up to date what Clean sweep says and also JSA if you reach out to them...

good catch

Good chance Clean Sweep knows who the forger is, or at least whoever is working as the fence for the forger.

Wow ... that is amazing detective skills. Nice work! I sure hope Clean Sweep makes this right.

Once again I am reminded why I should continue to avoid collecting autographs. Nice detective work on the part of the person who uncovered this. I hope everything is made right.

Nice detective work Manny!

Good on SGC to not just accept the LOA as gospel and to make their own unbiased determination.

Impressive detective work too!!

Please definitely let us know what happens when you confront Clean Sweep about this. I'm very interested in this one.

Marquard
 

The marquard pic was taken 8/16/18 and was given the cert #z86117. I wonder if the corresponding serial #’d items were photographed the same day? Perhaps a bulk submission by the person forging the items?

The one before was a Joe DiMaggio signed baseball but the one after is a Lefty Gomez signed card.

There are about 1/2 dozen williams signed cards down the line... all felt tip, all submitted 8/16 which turns out to be the first day of the white plains show... one of the williams is in the current clean sweep auction...

Wonder if they all have the same submission number on the loas?

That 1954 Topps Williams in blue sharpie looks so fake...cert #Z86120. Only a couple of numbers after the Marquard.

Gomez was in the September/October auction.

I'd be inclined to bring this to the attention of the authorities in an effort to further clean out this hobby. The hope is that Verk and JSA come out clean and just look a little foolish. It'd be nice to get the forger or people trying to pass it off.

There should be a few good leads out there:

Who requested the authentication?
Who owned the card when it was sent to JSA?

Card was authenticated on/about 22AUG18, around 2-3 weeks prior to the start of the auction.

You have to figure there is a consignor on record and a check was written to that person.

What really blows me away is the fact JSA passed it. They're looking pretty silly as an authenticator at this point.

I suppose nothing should really surprise us anymore when it comes to this hobby.

May be time to re-evaluate this hobby....:mad:

Maybe also see somehow who bought it graded. I can only imagine the blame game coming down the line

SetBuilder - Manny great detective work! On the trail of grading and auto authentication both companies probably have a name and order on file - more than likely also credit card numbers.... should easily be enough for the LEO's to track down and prosecute...

Man all of those Williams down the line look like they were signed with the same type of pen as the Marquard.

Now to only find out who purchased it/submitted it....

Maybe the sale is on VCP? We could see the seller and buyer, or at least it's a start. I'm not sure worth point had than info

This is why you have to be insane to spend a lot of money on a "signed" card.

I am told by a very reliable source that the autograph was authenticated by Jimmy Spence himself at the CleanSweep Auctions office.

Can your source find out if all of the William autos were in the same group being submitted.

As someone said above, kudos to SGC on this one. And Manny also.

Very interesting to see where this trail leads. So much info is available or stored electronically these days, and with the short time frame from PSA encapsulated card to defaced T206, I would be surprised if a trail of ownership can't be put together shortly.

I'm going to have to binge watch this thread like a new season of 'Stranger Things'.

I own that one from sig auctions and also this one which is somewhat similar. I believe I had both recently authenticated. I do not expect authenticators to be 100% but this finding is disturbing. What do you folks think of these 2?? If you look at all the ones Paul posted on T206 collector maybe half a dozen fit the pattern to some extent
Attachment 335411

Attachment 335412

He said they were not. It is a completely different source.

Autograph collecting is a scary hobby, and this kind of revelation can shock it to the core. But it’s not any more scary to me than dealing in unsigned but valuable pre-war cards, which are susceptible to fraud as well (see Mastro Wagner).

Hopefully this kind of discovery will help strengthen the hobby in the long run by reminding us all how careful you have to be. Provenance is important, but hard to find in many cases. On the valuable ones, I try to have more than one authenticator review the item. But as long as authenticators are human they will make mistakes.

The sad irony of our hobby - cards and autographs - is that if PSA or JSA say the item isn’t good, then it doesn’t even matter if you pulled the card from a pack, or got the signature yourself in person. If a card doctor or forger is successful, the item gains an unjustified legitimacy as long as we continue to buy the holder not the card.

I’ll be updating the signed T206 Marquard pages to remove this one, and possibly the other one done in exactly the same spot and angle described here. It’s a damn shame, but the prevalence of signed T206 Marquards earning $1,000+ hammer prices appears to have invited forgers into this game. Marquard’s is such a common signature it is apparently all the more likely to pass the glazed eyes of a third-party authenticator.

Apparently some moreso than others

I like both of these still Michael. I’m going to go out on a limb and say that yours was the original source of the faked one. It may very well be near identical for that reason — the fake one looks slower and sloppier, as if traced or copied from yours. The baseline angles and starting points illustrated in a post earlier in this thread supports this theory.

Sharpie?
 

He died in 1980 at the age of 94. Wouldn't the sharpie signature be the first clue that this card was likely faked?

"Prove"?

I respectfully disagree.

Doug

Sharpies were introduced to the world in 1964.

http://global.sharpie.com/en-CA/about-us

One of those williams is in this months clean sweep auction... something doesnt smell right here

Yeah, you're probably right. I was reaching a little there LOL

It makes you wonder if there are Larry Doyle auto fakes out there too. Certainly not as valuable as a HOFer, but those tend to go for $1k+ now.

SGC kudos
 

Not only is it embarrassing to JSA, but I would say kudos to the guys at SGC for being able to nail it without having the proof behind it. They did their homework, instead of relying on a pice of paper. Nice work, SGC!

I'm sure there are -- but I have not seen any that I thought were suspicious. They're all signed in blue ballpoint, and look reasonably similar. Marquards, for whatever reason, have more variation -- and there has been plenty of evidence that certain versions may have been wife-signed.

Keep in mind that 10 of the 26 known Doyles all came from the same collection that was sold in "The Great Pittsburgh Find of Signed T206 Cards" in 2007. Only 4 of the 50+ known Marquards came from that collection. Marquard, being a Hall of Famer, signed a whole lot more stuff and is more susceptible to forgery.

Quote from T206 collector-I’ll be updating the signed T206 Marquard pages to remove this one, and possibly the other one done in exactly the same spot and angle described here.

I am hoping mine got from sig auctions and posted here was just the autograph the other with the photomatched card copied from as to angle, etc. since we do not have the exact presigned card located. Sometimes when I find out things like this I ewant to just sell the whole collection, depressing. I don't blame JSA. Even the Mayo clinic admits that physicians diagnosis is incorrect at least 20+% of the time. Mistakes will be made- it is just knowing that JSA, PSA etc are only opinions and much of the time by knowledgable folks.

You have to give SGC credit for not authenticating it, even with the JSA cert.

It will be interesting how this all shakes out.


Cliff,

If there is no investigation because Cleansweep refunded the money, then that will be sad. I would also request a refund for the money spent to have it authenticated by SGC. That only seems fair. Somehow I get the feeling you won't have any problem collecting that fee.

Forgery Follow-up
 

Well…. All I can say off the bat is WOW! What a crazy story…

First of all I would like to apologize to the SGC authenticators. This thread went from what I thought would be an SGC bashing thread to a praise for their services! Thank you to SGC! Awesome job. I called them to personally leave a message of thanks.

Secondly…. What an awesome response to my “CALL FOR HELP!” I would like to thank all the members that spent time and energy in researching this card and signature, I cannot thank you enough! We may balk and chatter at one another from time to time, but when we put our collective minds together for a common cause, we cannot be stopped…. You guys are awesome and I am proud to be a member of this community!

That being said, I was heartbroken at the outcome, spending my nearly annual card budget on a forgery. Sickening…. My only hope is that this episode will help shine some light on the seedy dark corners of this hobby, and perhaps keep someone else from getting burned.

PS – Good news is that I just received and email with an apology, also advising that an error was made and restitution will be provided. I am to return the card and the LOA and the authenticators will offer me a full refund. I will update the post when restitution is made.

Thank you to Clean Sweep Auctions and JSA for offering to step up!

Mostly, thank you to the members that contributed, and this Forum for providing me the opportunity to share my story...

Much appreciated!

Cliff

Now let’s see if they’re going to actually do something about this or just sweep it under the rug and allow all of the other forgeries this guy got authenticated to sell.

With the short time between when the card was sold without the signature and the time it was consigned with a signature. It shouldn't be too hard to figure out who the forger is. The person needs to be barred from every auction house.

...and arrested.

Going forward that is good but what about what is already out there? Was this the first time they were able to get an item through?

Cliff,

Great to see that you were made whole.

Unfortunately, buying a forgery has become a rite of passage in the autograph hobby. After you buy a few, your eyes will be much more calibrated and able to detect fakes.

The lesson to be learned here is to be a little more skeptical.

The lesson I’ve learned here is to treat anything authenticated by Jim Spence about the same as I would by Homer Simpson. Why in the world would anyone trust any authenticatication he does when in mere minutes a member of this board was able to determine it a forgery? Are they really that lazy? I think I know the answer to my own question. While it’s wonderful the purchaser is made whole and presumably the bad guy is going to easily be able to be tracked down and hopefully prosecuted, that still leaves us with the shoddy work of Jim Spence. Should each of his authentication letters now come with a caveat that he is about 80% sure the autograph is for real?

This is great advice. I have been burned a few times on signed T206s that I wanted to believe were real -- and then learned were not and why. A JSA LOA is usually as solid as it gets, but as I said above, on the higher value ones, I try to have more than one authenticator review the item. I usually get LOAs from JSA and then encapsulation by SGC, which is basically what you tried to do here. I haven't been burned yet by an SGC rejection of a JSA-approved item, but I do know that when I offer to include JSA LOAs with items to SGC that they don't want them. It seems they do, in fact, make an independent assessment, which I agree they deserve credit for here.