any help on this ruth
 

Posted By: <b>dave</b><p>i bought this about 4 years ago i think is' good but would like an opinion <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1107463021.JPG"> <br /><br /><br />edited to fix pic

any help on this ruth
 

Posted By: <b>Sean Coe</b><p>The "th" looks different than most signatures that I have seen.

any help on this ruth
 

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>He's right. Here's a real one for comparison:<br /><br /><img src="http://www.lewisbaseballcards.com/classes/baseBallCard/images/751Lg.jpg"><br /><br />But yours is close enought that it would be tough to call it fake without an expert analyzing the strokes, etc.

any help on this ruth
 

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>she was very good at signing his name but always signed a bit more cleanly and vertically than him.

any help on this ruth
 

Posted By: <b>Rob L</b><p>That should be looked at. Here is another pencil autograph that is from a signed receipt.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1107474016.JPG">

any help on this ruth
 

Posted By: <b>rick</b><p>I checked it against the one I know for sure is authentic and I would say it is good. I agree that the "t" is slightly different than most you will see. But comparing it to other known good examples, you will find that Ruth crossed his "t" at the top and in the middle. The angle looks good. I sometimes think if his name was more that 8 letters the scumbags would give up on try to pass off phoneys. But there are plenty of people who could probably do a pretty good Ruth, and without an expert looking at it you can only cross your fingers. what if his name was Arnold Schwartznegger? Albert Schoendienst? or some other long names. George Herman Ruthensteinsmitzenhoffer. Now that would be a signiture to have.<br />