A couple of "beauties" that did not go cheaply

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by BrandonG

The second Ruth ball is on eBay right now. And just FYI, both of those Harridge Baseballs are not genuine. I feel like calling Drew directly...Pretty ridiculous.

Here is the auction you are referring to, Brandon. It, too, is authenticated by Drew Max who calls himself a FDE (Forensic Document Examiner).

Aside from the autographs being horrific, can you please explain what makes both baseballs not genuine? Thank you, Brandon.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1936-HALL-OF...item3f1abd0abf

m3-2.jpg

m3-3.jpg

m3-4.jpg

m3-5.jpg

m3-1.jpg

[thetruthisoutthere]

Here is the Lou Gehrig from the above auction. Look how slowly drawn that garbage is. The seller is asking $35K or Best Offer? Seriously?

m3-6.jpg

[BrandonG]

There are obvious characteristics in the stamping that show me this is transfer type of application. The ink quality is not typical of stamping that was used for that 1934-1939 model, it shows dotting and inkjet characteristics. second, it is not at all crisp like genuine models, even worn stamping is still legible and crisp even if its faded. Third, in the bottom logo from the pictures you posted, in the "Cushioned Cork Center" stamping, the "K" in Cork, and the "C" in Center are touching and nearly on top of each other. This is what happens when a transfer type of stamp bends to the curvature of the ball whereas the sheet or transfer is flat, and when pressed onto a round surface it causes it to bend and overlap (think of when you used to use patterns on paper to carve pumpkins). Fourth, The ball itself is worn only behind the stamping areas, this is done so the ink doesn't bleed, but it's a complete giveaway. Look at the "Q" in "Quality", it has bled because the ball was too slick in that area to hold the ink. This would never happen with the metal stamps and ink quality used in that era. Also the leather and stitching are not consistent with that model ball.

PS, did I mention my authentication service yet? lol

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by BrandonG

There are obvious characteristics in the stamping that show me this is transfer type of application. The ink quality is not typical of stamping that was used for that 1934-1939 model, it shows dotting and inkjet characteristics. second, it is not at all crisp like genuine models, even worn stamping is still legible and crisp even if its faded. Third, in the bottom logo from the pictures you posted, in the "Cushioned Cork Center" stamping, the "K" in Cork, and the "C" in Center are touching and nearly on top of each other. This is what happens when a transfer type of stamp bends to the curvature of the ball whereas the sheet or transfer is flat, and when pressed onto a round surface it causes it to bend and overlap (think of when you used to use patterns on paper to carve pumpkins). Fourth, The ball itself is worn only behind the stamping areas, this is done so the ink doesn't bleed, but it's a complete giveaway. Look at the "Q" in "Quality", it has bled because the ball was too slick in that area to hold the ink. This would never happen with the metal stamps and ink quality used in that era. Also the leather and stitching are not consistent with that model ball.

PS, did I mention my authentication service yet? lol

Brandon, thank you very much. Would you mind if I sent that information directly to Drew Max and Marc Goldman?

Also, feel free to advertise your new Baseball Authentication Service as often as you like.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Also, feel free to advertise your new Baseball Authentication Service as often as you like.

I agree that it's a much-needed service, and no one is more qualified than Brendon, but...

Since when have you become a moderator or site owner?

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

I agree that it's a much-needed service, and no one is more qualified than Brendon, but...

Since when have you become a moderator or site owner?

Who is "Brendon," Mr. Atkatz?

[packs]

Oh great another one of those threads.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by BrandonG

There are obvious characteristics in the stamping that show me this is transfer type of application. The ink quality is not typical of stamping that was used for that 1934-1939 model, it shows dotting and inkjet characteristics. second, it is not at all crisp like genuine models, even worn stamping is still legible and crisp even if its faded. Third, in the bottom logo from the pictures you posted, in the "Cushioned Cork Center" stamping, the "K" in Cork, and the "C" in Center are touching and nearly on top of each other. This is what happens when a transfer type of stamp bends to the curvature of the ball whereas the sheet or transfer is flat, and when pressed onto a round surface it causes it to bend and overlap (think of when you used to use patterns on paper to carve pumpkins). Fourth, The ball itself is worn only behind the stamping areas, this is done so the ink doesn't bleed, but it's a complete giveaway. Look at the "Q" in "Quality", it has bled because the ball was too slick in that area to hold the ink. This would never happen with the metal stamps and ink quality used in that era. Also the leather and stitching are not consistent with that model ball.

PS, did I mention my authentication service yet? lol

Bravo. Real expertise and analysis... not meaningless forensic mumble jumbo.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

Bravo. Real expertise and analysis... not meaningless forensic mumble jumbo.

+1

So tell us Mr. Max; what forensic examinations did you perform on those two baseballs?

Did you first attempt to date the items?

Did you analyze the ink?

And finally, what exemplars did you use to authenticate those autographs as authentic?

Mr. Max, did you happen to observe how slowly drawn those autographs were penned? And with that humongous-sized magnifying glass you use........

[Wymers Auction]

I think Ruth signed that ball with a tattoo gun!!!!

[thetruthisoutthere]

Ebay has removed the auction.