Genuine Babe Ruth Autographs

[Runscott]

There is another characteristic that is even more blatantly different between the 2 columns, and it involves the 'B' (and it's 11 out of 11)

[Frozen in Time]

Thanks Matt. Scott I think I see what you mean about the B's - very consistent in the alleged grouping.

[BrandonG]

Can you really make a comparison from paper written signatures and baseballs? I'm not saying those aren't fake, but always wondered why some people would use authentic paper written signatures and compare them to baseballs. The writing method would seem substantially different.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by BrandonG

Can you really make a comparison from paper written signatures and baseballs? I'm not saying those aren't fake, but always wondered why some people would use authentic paper written signatures and compare them to baseballs. The writing method would seem substantially different.

I was thinking the same thing. Why no signed balls in the left column? Surely there have to be some verified exemplars on balls.

Also, I could be mistaken, but it appears some of the images of the balls on the right have been "flattened," which could lead to further distortion.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by BrandonG

Can you really make a comparison from paper written signatures and baseballs? I'm not saying those aren't fake, but always wondered why some people would use authentic paper written signatures and compare them to baseballs. The writing method would seem substantially different.

It isn't substantially different at all. One's handwriting is one's handwriting. And the amazing thing is that it is independent of the set of muscles being used.

As a research physicist and professor, I have spent the largest portion of my life writing on blackboards, using my arm and shoulder muscles, rather than my hand and wrist muscles. Yet my large writing on the board is identical to my small writing on paper--and this holds true for all I have seen. The characteristics that define one's handwriting, are, as we physicists would say, invariant.

[Mr. Zipper]

Looking at the right column, 5th up from the bottom.

The e on Babe is connected to Ruth.

I am not stating it's certainly an authentic example, but that seems like a highly unlikely choice for a forger to make -- sign the first and last name in one continuous line. In my experience, connections like his happen when one is signing quickly.

[prewarsports]

The problem is that ALL the autographs on the left are signed on paper and ALL the autographs on the right are signed on Baseballs. The way one signs a flat piece of paper at a desk is so much different than the way one signs a small 8 inch sphere while standing up.

I have thought this for a while, everyone jumps all over all the signed Ruth balls and claims that a huge percentage of the certified examples are forgeries and they use signed documents as proof. Its Apples and Oranges, or more like lettuce and Watermelons in difference. You dont even hold a pen the same way when signing these two surfaces, if you dont believe me try it. And steel tip fountain pens dig into the soft surface of a baseball if you push too hard and DONT have a more vertical stroke so everything has to change in order to sign the Baseball.

I have no skin in the game, I have never owned a Ruth single signed baseball for this very fear and unless I stumble on one from a players estate or something I probably never will.

I would just much rather see comparisons from team signed Balls with Ruth signatures (In which context helps prove authenticity) compared to the singles than paper v. Signed Baseballs but hey, what do I know, I am not a "professional".

[David Atkatz]

There is no characteristic difference between a person's signature on a baseball, and on a flat.
The pen is held in the same way--just look at photos of Ruth or Gehrig signing baseballs, and signing their contracts.
The baseball is rotated as the person signs, so that the pen always makes contact at the same level--just like on a flat.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

It isn't substantially different at all. One's handwriting is one's handwriting. And the amazing thing is that it is independent of the set of muscles being used.

As a research physicist and professor, I have spent the largest portion of my life writing on blackboards, using my arm and shoulder muscles, rather than my hand and wrist muscles. Yet my large writing on the board is identical to my small writing on paper--and this holds true for all I have seen. The characteristics that define one's handwriting, are, as we physicists would say, invariant.

But couldn't some individuals develop different habits writing on a sphere, than on a flat surface? For instance, maybe Ruth just happens to sign the 'B' in 'Babe' more vertically on a baseball. It's the first letter in his signature and he's just managed to get the ball gripped and the pen ready, so maybe that one line - the first - in his signature, is a little different when written on a ball? This wouldn't have to be true for all people, but possibly for some. I'm just throwing that out there because the left line in all 11 of the 'B's in the signatures on the right are more vertical than the ones on the left.

In any event, it would be interesting to see if the 'B' in any of your baseball-signed Ruths that we know are real, are also more vertical.

[David Atkatz]

I suppose it could be possible, Scott--although I highly doubt it.
I'll check out all the genuine Ruth-signed balls I can find.

[JimStinson]

If one is to rely strictly on things like "slant", "Formation", etc. etc. in determining an autograph's authenticity. You'll likely succeed in avoiding the crude, average to slightly above average forgers on the ladder.

The especially talented ones have NAILED the above mentioned characteristics because they are ...to quote Mick Jagger "Practiced at the art of deception".

Master counterfeiters whos deception is to produce fake currency can draw a twenty dollar bill FREEHAND is it not then conceivable that someone can produce an exact replica of a BABE RUTH autograph or anyone else's using known examples ?

In the book "The Art of Making Money" the story of a master counterfeiter ..I quote
"Art Williams. took to crime almost immediately, starting with petty theft before graduating to robbing drug dealers. Eventually a man nicknamed "DaVinci" taught him the centuries-old art of counterfeiting. After a stint in jail, Williams emerged to discover that the Treasury Department had issued the most secure hundred-dollar bill ever created: the 1996 New Note. Williams spent months trying to defeat various security features before arriving at a bill so perfect that even law enforcement had difficulty distinguishing it from the real thing. Williams went on to print millions in counterfeit bills"

My point being that there should be other factors at play in determining an autograph's authenticity than just what it LOOKS like. Subtle things that take years to learn because the REALLY, REALLY talented elite are not cranking out Rube Marquards, George Kellys or even Thurman Munson's or Roger Maris. They are doing SINGLE SIGNED mint to near perfect sweet spot signed baseballs of Ruth, Gehrig, Mathewson and the like that upon completion are going to command 6 figures or more.
______________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[mschwade]

Originally Posted by Runscott

There is another characteristic that is even more blatantly different between the 2 columns, and it involves the 'B' (and it's 11 out of 11)

Wow, wasn't noticeable until you gave the hint and now is totally obvious. Glad to say mine checks out again