Cy Young Authentication Help

[AzMot]

This ball was purchased at auction with AAU (Drew V Max) certification. After numerous searches on this site and others I am very worried. Could I get your opinions.

[/IMG]

[CMIZ5290]

Wow, if it's a fake it's a damn good one. The only thing though is the ink looks so dark and so new. That's what would worry me. What type of ball is it?

[ScottR81]

Here mine that I recently purchased from a board member here.

[AzMot]

It's a Spalding. Here are pictures of the ball logo.
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

Wow, if it's a fake it's a damn good one. The only thing though is the ink looks so dark and so new. That's what would worry me. What type of ball is it?

I agree with Kevin on all counts. It looks real, but that signature is darker than virtually every other Cy Young signed balls that I have ever seen, FWIW...

[MGHPro]

If im correct, Giles became president in 51 and Young died in 55, so its a short window to get it signed.

[BrandonG]

I'm afraid you've got a problem here. The Giles baseball in the photo is the later 1958-1969 Model ball. Since Cy Young passed in November of 1955, it would have been impossible for him to sign that type of ball. Sorry.

+1 for the baseball expert and not an authenticator! All of this and more can be found in my future publication of: History of the Base Ball

[GrayGhost]

Dumb ? from me. what is the difference in the balls? My eyesight isn't great, so Im missing something

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by BrandonG

I'm afraid you've got a problem here. The Giles baseball in the photo is the later 1958-1969 Model ball. Since Cy Young passed in November of 1955, it would have been impossible for him to sign that type of ball. Sorry.

+1 for the baseball expert and not an authenticator! All of this and more can be found in my future publication of: History of the Base Ball

Nice job, Brandon!
I was hoping that you would check in on the intricacies of the Giles ball. I had a feeling that it may provide a clue that would add additional questions about the liklihood that Cy could have signed it.

I would also like to state, in my experience, that later authentic examples of Cy's signature really took a dive in quality later in life. The Cy signature on the ball on this thread is pretty atypical for this time period. It appears too "strong" and "bold" if this makes sense.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by BrandonG

I'm afraid you've got a problem here. The Giles baseball in the photo is the later 1958-1969 Model ball. Since Cy Young passed in November of 1955, it would have been impossible for him to sign that type of ball. Sorry.

+1 for the baseball expert and not an authenticator! All of this and more can be found in my future publication of: History of the Base Ball

Very nice work and great information, Brandon.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

Wow, if it's a fake it's a damn good one. The only thing though is the ink looks so dark and so new. That's what would worry me. What type of ball is it?

I'm curious why you would ask if it's authentic or not after you purchased or won it? Why didn't you research the autograph before you made the purchase?

This is why buyers of forgeries, in my opinion, are 50% of the problem when it comes to forgeries in the hobby. If you don't buy crap like that, then the sellers of forgeries don't stay in business. This puzzles the crap out of me.

Secondly, that Cy Young isn't close to a "good forgery." It's pathetic.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

I'm curious why you would ask if it's authentic or not after you purchased or won it? Why didn't you research the autograph before you made the purchase?

This is why buyers of forgeries, in my opinion, are 50% of the problem when it comes to forgeries in the hobby. If you don't buy crap like that, then the sellers of forgeries don't stay in business. This puzzles the crap out of me.

Secondly, that Cy Young isn't close to a "good forgery." It's pathetic.

Nice. Kinda like "She deserved it, dressed like that." There's nothing quite like blaming the victim.

Sorry you got burned on that one, AzMot, but with the rock-solid proof of forgery (proof, rather than opinion), perhaps you can get your money back.
And, for future reference, there are plenty of people here who are happy to help you learn, and won't belittle you for making a mistake.

[gashouse34]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Nice. Kinda like "She deserved it, dressed like that." There's nothing quite like blaming the victim.

Sorry you got burned on that one, AzMot, but with the rock-solid proof of forgery (proof, rather than opinion), perhaps you can get your money back.
And, for future reference, there are plenty of people here who are happy to help you learn, and won't belittle you for making a mistake.

100% agree with you David.

[scooter729]

Originally Posted by gashousegang_1

100% agree with you David.

1,000% agree - let's not jump on someone with blame, when they came looking for some assistance....

[Ease]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Nice. Kinda like "She deserved it, dressed like that." There's nothing quite like blaming the victim.

Sorry you got burned on that one, AzMot, but with the rock-solid proof of forgery (proof, rather than opinion), perhaps you can get your money back.
And, for future reference, there are plenty of people here who are happy to help you learn, and won't belittle you for making a mistake.

Top class post from the doc. +1 zillion.

[travrosty]

If you look at his original post, he trusted the authenticatior. He only came on here to ask after doing some searching on the internet.

You can trust psa and jsa and buy an authenticated item with an LOA from them, then search on the internet and find criticism of psa and jsa, and then show a recently bought wife signed sonny liston on this forum slabbed like this one authenticated by psa, or the other one that was given an LOA from James Spence Authentication and sold at Geppi's, and then you can be called an idiot too by not doing your own liston research beforehand even though it had authentication certs?

If it's a problem of trusting AAU, and getting blasted for it, then what about the poor soul that trusts psa or jsa and ends up with a wife signed? that guy must be a moron too. We have to vet and check out all psa and jsa sigs from now on also. don't trust them and then ask opinions after you buy if you have misgivings about them later on.


Is that how it works? someone has a psa or jsa certed item, comes on here, shows it, asks for opinion, it fails, and he's an idiot for buying it and trusting the authenticator, or is it just someone who trusts and gets burned by an authenticator you don't like? Those are the only idiots I suppose.

Reality is that the authenticators need to be accountable for their authentication, and if someone gets burned, they aren't idiots, but should get their money back or be made whole. To all psa and jsa buyers, in the scenario presented here, if you trust them and end up with a psa or jsa dud, to be fair, you are the problem!

Just pointing out the paradox and hypocrisy in the autograph world. If you get burned by authenticator A, you asked for it, and you are a moron. if you get burned by authenticator b, it was just a mistake, you aren't a moron and no big deal.