Baseballs that have been forged

[Runscott]

Does anyone have a list of OAL and ONL baseballs (by year) that have been forged, and how to i.d. them? Thanks

[Runscott]

I guess that is a 'no'.

[w7imel]

Not sure scott...(does that help?...haha sorry couldnt resist)

[ruth-gehrig]

Contact Brandon Grunbaum, author of the History of the Baseball via info@historyofthebaseball.com
Im sure he would have a good idea.

[Runscott]

Thanks Michael, will do.

Mike, it did not take you long to become one of the funniest guys in the history of this forum....of course, you do know that today is 'opposite day'.

[vintagesportscollector]

The folks at the BLBB forum should be able to help as well. They are the most knowledgeable on OAL and ONL balls from the early 20th C to the present.

If you post the question there I would expect some good response.

http://forum.bigleaguebaseballs.com/index.php

[Runscott]

Thanks Joe. I have an email in to Brandon - if I don't hear back from him, I'll post in the forum you suggested.

I recently purchased a 1925 OAL Reach baseball that I feel certain is legit (in January pick-ups thread), but I'm thinking that since I might be acquiring more signed vintage balls, this is an area I should grow some skills in.

[vintagesportscollector]

You may find this thread on determining fake balls helpful....

http://forum.bigleaguebaseballs.com/...lit=Fake#p2774

[w7imel]

sorry scott, I couldnt resist being a smart ass! I do it all day long at work so why not share the love with you guys!

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by vintagesportscollector

You may find this thread on determining fake balls helpful....

http://forum.bigleaguebaseballs.com/...lit=Fake#p2774

Thanks. Brandon got back to me and I sent him scans of my ball. I checked out the 'baseball museum', which has great examples;unfortunately, it doesn't have an exact example of my ball.

The thread you linked to implies that forgeries of old balls are generally easy to spot because the forgers generally use balls with protruded laces and/or they use laser-printing instead of real stamps. I was under the impression that there were some pretty good forgeries of Ruth-era baseballs, and the balls themselves often proved that the autograph had to be bad, since the balls were forgeries. Now I'm wondering if I misread something during those discussions. It seems to me that it would make much more sense for a forger to use a supply of well-made forged balls than to pay $500 or so for real ones and risk screwing up while signing. But I guess you could screw up quite a few single-signed Ruth balls and still make money, and besides - a lot of money has been spent for fairly bad Ruth forgeries, so the demand for them is there.

[Runscott]

Thanks for everyone's help. I felt as good about a Babe Ruth autographed ball as one can feel, but this was my first 'big' signed vintage ball purchase and I have a feeling I will be picking up more of them. That being the case, I need to get edumacated. Brandon said the ball is good. I'll be buying his set of two books to learn more: http://www.historyofthebaseball.com

[vintagesportscollector]

They are great books. Have found them to be valuable resources.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by vintagesportscollector

They are great books. Have found them to be valuable resources.

+1

Brandon is a valuable resource as well, and I've found him to be very friendly and helpful when I have ball-related questions. Definitely an asset to the hobby, and I appreciate his willingness to share his knowledge.