Opinions on Ruth please!

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Sean1125

the guy drove from out of state to sell me a collection this was an after thought ... this is really that bad? Can you pm me why?

Where should I start?

[MooseDog]

To start with, the fact that there is no postmark is a GIANT red flag for a piece that ostensibly was put in the mail.

[Sean1125]

Originally Posted by MooseDog

To start with, the fact that there is no postmark is a GIANT red flag for a piece that ostensibly was put in the mail.

Makes perfect sense thank you.

[packs]

Looks like some feathering in the ink. That can happen when new ink is applied to old paper and can be a tip off.

[RichardSimon]

Look at how the ink wells up at the bottom of the t and right after the start of the u,,, whoever signed it (and I don't mean the Babe) was squeezing the life out of the pen at those points.

[David Atkatz]

Ruth's signature changed over time. There are many indications that the PC is a forgery, but it's also a forgery of a later-than-1923 style signature. Even if it were a better forgery, it's wrong for the time.

And the card is way too "busy." (partially typed, lines hand-drawn, etc.) It makes no sense. If Ruth sent the PC (which, as mentioned above is NOT postmarked), why would he put in lines labelled "Name" and "Address"?

[earlywynnfan]

As if you don't have enough question marks, I'll raise another: why were two different typewriters used??

Ken