Is this Ruth good?
 

http://i450.photobucket.com/albums/q...psdigqyci1.png

http://i450.photobucket.com/albums/q...pshzoaa6dk.png

IMO No, looks VERY slowly drawn

I profess no knowledge of Ruth's signature. The inscription has me puzzled. Do you think Ruth would accidentally cross the 'l' in Jacqueline? If it is a forgery do you think the forger so conditioned himself to automatically cross the upstroke letter?

Perhaps a secretarial?

No good

Maybe the name really is "Jacquetine" not "Jacqueline". But regardless, I personally think it's a forgery. Not only is it kind of shaky, but the ink looks modern....at least from the scan.

100% no good

Its crazy because i informed the seller its no good and she was outraged. We spoke on the phone and shes a older lady in her 70's who has had it for years and her mom got it personally signed in the 40's in florida. Her mom passed away and said her father could confirm its genuine. She was almost offended and was very firm that its no doubt authentic. Im confused

David.....??? What do you think about this piece? You opinion greatly valued when it comes to Ruth items......

Well if the lady, who SOUNDS like she's in her 70's, said so, it must be true.

Lol...sorry i meant shes in her 70's

No offense Joey, how do you know? Did you see a drivers license or any proof of this??:confused:

Thats a good point im just going off what she said and the sound of her voice. She told me the full story about how her mom got it. Im sure if i asked for a copy of her license i could probably get it. I dont know man. I always do alot of research on things im gonna buy or bought. I havent bought this but if you talked to her youd be convinced

Joey, what did she say her mom's name is?

Jacqueline....doesnt look anything like that

There's are two important elements to consider in this:

1. The original owner told a phony story to impress family
2. The current seller is lying

I agree with you on that.

Actually it does. As I mentioned earlier it looks like Jacqueline and the 'l' was crossed to make it look like a 't' and reads as Jacquetine.

That happens so much. I have had a father lying to me right in front of his two sons about a facsimile signed baseball. Swearing to me he got it personally signed. And the boys were standing there looking so embarrassed. I told him "maybe you got a ball signed, but not this one."

For those who may have been curious where this one ended up going after eBay (hard not to remember the "JacqueTine" inscription...)

https://www.pricerealized.com/#!/Ite...ily-Provenance

Youve got to be kidding me....wow! I submitted that twice to psa for a quick opinion...both came back no good and on top of that everyone i showed it to thought the same.....wow!

When the guys forging Ruth autographs are so good anymore that they can do it good enough that the TPA's will authenticate and pass it, the autograph market is in a world of hurt especially when one TPA and the other one can't even agree. The experts on Ruth autograph all seem to be on net 54 they're the ones who should be employed by the TPAs not the ones they have working for them now . Its just my opinion. It really makes me sick to know that a lot of people have Ruth autographs in their collection that are totally fake.

I know theres alot of authentic ruth autographs out there but losing faith in TPA's really prevents people from enjoying this hobby. Sucks....i had this for 2k but passed after all the information i received

One other thing i just remembered is the lady told me her mother got this signed in either the late 20's or early 30's.

Just FYI, the photograph itself is later in life than that.

Oh i know.. thats whats funny...

After reading the comments on this item it always amazes me that the amount of anger or belligerence by a seller seems to be directly proportional to the degree of questioning of an item's provenance or amount paid for it once it enters the market no matter what the proof is that the item is questionable or fake.