Jim Bottomley Signature variations
 

The question came up yesterday with a collector friend about the wide variations in the signature of Hall of Famer Jim Bottomley , Find here a few examples to illustrate. There was a "neat" version of his signature and a "sloppy" one. Both are the same person.
______________________________________
Sign up for my mailing list Vintage autographs for sale daily stinsonsports.com

Jim,

Gotta wonder if the pen type was part reason why signature was different. Could have been uncomfortable in his hand...ball point v. fountain or even size of the item being signed...

Just a shot in the dark...

JimStinson
 

Nope he was worse with pencil see another scan

Lol! Wow...maybe he was just lazy...:D:D:D

Thanks for sharing.

Funny how the "sloppy" version of his signature would be one of the neatest signatures among modern players, where you can't even read the name on 90% of them.

or just the difference between his autograph and his signature

Jim, on the cut picture of Bottomley, do you know where that originated from? The reason I ask is that I have a signed cut picture of Jim Lindsey that could very well be from the same piece. If I remember right, I believe mine was from the estate of Mike Gonzalez.

Not all that unusual.
Lou Gehrig had a "neat" and a "sloppy" ballpark signature, too:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j2...z/gehrigPC.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j2...tz/gehrig1.jpg

JimStinson
 

Mike, The Bottomley picture did indeed come from Mike Gonzalez estate in Cuba
______________________
Sign up for my mailing list Vintage Autographs for sale daily stinsonsports.com

Thanks Jim. I bet that would have been a really cool item when it was all in one piece, although I'm very happy it was cut so that I could get the Lindsey.
Back to the original subject, I've seen a lot more "neat" autos of Bottomley than the messy ones, to the point where I thought the rushed ones were fake when I first started seeing them. Nice to see the variations and confirm that both types are good.

JimStinson
 

There was no way to keep the Cardinals photo "intact" because by the time I found it insects and rodents had eaten half of it (smile)

Oh nooooooooo:eek: