What are the chances?
 

Any chance this is good. I'm way out of my scope here.

No chance IMO.

Why?

Letter formation, baseline alignment, crossing of "t". It is off.

Why do I always think of this scene from Dumb and Dumber.

Does this mean you think the card and autograph are bad?

Is it me or does this card look like it was taken to a nail salon? Those corners are so perfectly rounded you would think it was issued that way.

This was moved from another section so a few more eyes can see it.

.

+1

There's possible erasure marks to the left of "Boston" where the word reprint goes on some of these.

Just looks like something made to look old, do you see any bleeding through the card from the auto or text from front? look at the card with a real decent light.

Seeing something like this in person makes a big difference, so you can hold it and look at the cardboard.

Jimmy

If there was any chance of it being real it would be slabbed. Too much money to leave on the table.

That was my initial impression, also.

I’d have to see this in person but I wouldn’t rule this out whatsoever. I would start by finding out if the card is authentic and go from there. You cannot rule this autograph out at all. It’s really really really close and to my trained eye it just looks like it was squeezed to fit in the space.

I am not an auto expert at all, but while it's a good reprint...it's not good enough. The paper type seems off and the border coloring is no good in comparison to the exposed worn paper. It's a no from over here, take it for the 2 cents it's worth.

For a mere 25k

https://www.ebay.com/itm/17474705557...UAAOSwyDpghCo0


.

I guess that does it, Leon. The card I posted is in a small local auction.
The one you posted is obviously the same card. I guess is first come first
served.

Consider yourself lucky you saved 25k. :cool:

.

Seller sells everything from watches to guitars. No knowledge base on cards from what I can see on past listings so they could easily be fooled by a good reproduction. Not sure this one is a good one. The corners are rounded perfectly and even though it has very rounded corners and a nick at the bottom it is very clean otherwise which doesn't add up to me.

The ebay seller is from Florida. The local auction is in New York State. The seller seems to be in two places at once.

I'm going to the Auction Preview today and will take a look at it. Although I am NOT an Autograph collector, I do agree that this card just doesn't look right.

I know the Auctioneer and he is more likely to tell me to pound salt than withdraw the Lot, though.

He sells everything "As Is, Where Is" and has run a local Flea Market for MANY years!

I will report back...

Where is that auction, Greg?

Hey Eddie:

It's a Kelly Schultz Auction in Clarence, NY. I JUST looked at the card in person and in MY opinion, for what that is worth, I saw NOTHING that led me to believe that it is NOT a GENUINE '33 Goudey...

Stock is right, felt right, smelled right, printing looked correct, etc. - it passes MY "Stink Test"!

The Autograph - NOT MY BAG - I have no opinion on this matter.

The auctioneer's "story" passes, too. But that could be contrived, so I will not related it here.

As for the scan that Leon posted, it APPEARS that the picture was lifted from the auction listing as they are EXACTLY the same image.

The auctioneer allowed me to post some additional pictures, too, and here they are!

I keep coming back to Adam's point. What collector or auctioneer would sell a $50K+ item for a few thousand dollars when authenticating it would give credence to its genuineness and exponentially increase its selling price?

From what I was told... The Owner didn't want to gamble to price of grading & authentication...

I know, I know - THAT SMELLS REAL BAD!!

I don't think the autograph is good. Even IF the card were authentic, it could never be holdered unless the signature was authentic as well.

Card would still have value if it were authentic with a bad signature, but it couldn't be holdered unless both were good.

I do not see anything about the card or sig that would preclude either from being authentic. Whatever happened to “Buy the Card - not the Holder” (or lack thereof).

Maybe the consignor isn’t a collector, and didn’t have the ability to wait a year for the 3rd party “blessing”. He may need his money sooner, and/or couldn’t fathom the obscene premiums people pay for slabs? It’s a shame we’ve reached the point of condemning the card simply for not being slabbed.

Trying to legit a card like this especially with the auto through pictures online is tough, got to be held in hand..

I saw NOTHING that led me to believe that it is NOT a GENUINE '33 Goudey...

Stock is right, felt right, smelled right, printing looked correct, etc. - it passes MY "Stink Test"!

I stand behind my assessment above that the autograph is very very close and could certainly be authentic. I’d need to see it in hand however. I know Ruth extremely well and have studied it extensively. This simply looks like he condensed his signature to fit it in the space. This is more than likely authentic.

If this auctioneer honestly did not insist on submission and pay the fee himself that is a big red flag.
Its literally his job to maximize the price that these items go for.

He could have paid $300 or $600 fee at a lower level if he was not confident and happily paid the upcharge if it did come back legit.

And no it does not take a year to get a card like this graded or authenticated, it takes about 1-14 days depending on the level you pay for.

Sold $6500 plus fees

And how would you explain the difference in pen pressure? That too since his signature was condensed?

Maybe it was a windy card and the card kept flapping around while he was trying to sign


Sadly, whether he did, or didnt sign, it only matters what a TPGs opinion is, and doubtful this would pass

Whether authentic or not... the variance in pen pressure throughout the sig is a relatively common phenomenon. Some of Babe's sigs had uniform ink distribution throughout, but many did not. The fountain pens of the day were touchy and often unpredictable. A slight increase in pressure could easily result in a much darker/bolder line. Just a few examples of authentic sigs below...

I am no expert but I have not seen an authentic signed Ruth Goudey where he signs in open space only instead of across the image.

Obviously that doesn't mean much but just an observation.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

The buyer at $6500 plus buyer commission either hit a grand slam, if authentic, or struck out 27 straight times if not.

I saw a 1956 Topps set sold for $13,500 plus commission and a 1957 Topps set at $11,000 plus commission. No way to tell from the description and pictures the condition but those are strong bids unless the sets were very nice.

My sentiments exactly.

Nobody would choose to make $6,500 over $50,000+ unless it wasn't possible to make $50,000+. There is only one reason it wouldn't be possible. I guess two reasons if the card is not authentic.

There are plenty of people who inherit things they know nothing about and just consign to be sold at auction. It is possible that the consignor did absolutely no research and is thrilled to get $6500 for something they did not know had a much greater potential value.

I said from the beginning I did not like the autograph overall and I still don't but I agree with a few others that it just might be authentic.

I say that whoever paid $6500 + buyer premium for it probably did a lot more investigation into authenticity than we can from pictures. And there had to be at least 2 bidders thinking it was real to go from the minimum bid to $6500.

We may well see this card in a future major auction authenticated by JSA, PSA/DNA, or Beckett and it will bring a huge reward to the winning bidder.

I don't know anyone who doesn't want to make more money. Even less who are happy with losing out on it. I’m not an art guy but if I thought I had a Picasso I would find out before I sold it. Babe Ruth isn't just anyone.

signed 33 Ruth
 

The only way to confirm this is to use a 3x or 5x Loupe to see the card dot matrix and if this was live ink(very close exam of auto), but from scan, you cannot rule this out.

Looks like the auto did not pass unfortunately for the buyer.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/324718502836

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

That signed Ruth Goudey looks bad from a mile away.

The signature lacks all the confidence that authentic Ruth signatures possess. Flow, size, angle, placement. It’s a slowly executed and timid attempt. Compare it to authentic Ruth autographs, which have such speed and confidence.

He was very proud of his autograph, rightfully so. And it shows on authentic examples.

The item was an "autographed" Babe Ruth card. I don't think it is plausible that someone finds a legit autographed Babe Ruth card, doesn't know anything about Babe Ruth and does absolutely no research as to the item's value.

It's certainly plausible. I've seen it happen where people know who Babe is, but have no idea about values.