Babe Ruth?

[David Atkatz]

But Dan, Chris said above (and I quote):

"I trust my "autograph eye" more than anything else."

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

But Dan, Chris said above (and I quote):

"I trust my "autograph eye" more than anything else."

I think that any time an 'expert' gives thumbs-up on a signature that you ('you' meaning anyone on this forum) are certain is a forgery, you no longer pay much attention to their opinions. Especially when they never give a good reason for the opinion - and unfortunately, this is true of almost everyone on this forum. We'll say 'good' or 'bad', but if we give a reason we know that there's a likelihood that we'll get slapped around, or lose credibility. So no one likes to put themselves on the line.

But research is a different thing - if Chris does 'leg-work' and determines that this can't be a good Ruth, then I'm sure it isn't.

[Scott Garner]

Thanks to Shelly and Ben for providing different 1934 exemplars.
Ben, I can't believe that you have some many exemplars from 1934. Wow!

I'm glad that I'm not the one being asked my opinion about the signature on this ticket. I find it extremely challenging to tender an opinion, even with all of these terrific exemplars. Yikes!

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I think that any time an 'expert' gives thumbs-up on a signature that you ('you' meaning anyone on this forum) are certain is a forgery, you no longer pay much attention to their opinions. Especially when they never give a good reason for the opinion - and unfortunately, this is true of almost everyone on this forum. We'll say 'good' or 'bad', but if we give a reason we know that there's a likelihood that we'll get slapped around, or lose credibility. So no one likes to put themselves on the line.

But research is a different thing - if Chris does 'leg-work' and determines that this can't be a good Ruth, then I'm sure it isn't.

How much legwork was done? He claimed in his second post that it was bad yet at that time did not know it had been certed by JSA, believed it was rejected by PSA and I think we can tell from his posts that he believed that Heritage rejected it. Then claims that someone from Michigan who forged some other Ruth item that we are not allowed to see more than just the signature on also forged this Ruth ticket stub, yet the consignor is here and refutes all of that.

Dan

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

How much legwork was done? He claimed in his second post that it was bad yet at that time did not know it had been certed by JSA, believed it was rejected by PSA and I think we can tell from his posts that he believed that Heritage rejected it. Then claims that someone from Michigan who forged some other Ruth item that we are not allowed to see more than just the signature on also forged this Ruth ticket stub, yet the consignor is here and refutes all of that.

Dan

It's a big "if". Chris says he's been doing research - he just needs to show it to us.

Off to the game.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Runscott

It's a big "if". Chris says he's been doing research - he just needs to show it to us.

I won't hold my breath.

[earlywynnfan]

just spent 4 lousy hours watching the Tribe lose to the damn yankees, so I missed a lot here...

Chris, it's nice of you to finally post something!

From what I read into Chris' words, I'm wondering if perhaps he's checking into the fact that maybe Babe never did a radio show that day??

Ken

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

just spent 4 lousy hours watching the Tribe lose to the damn yankees, so I missed a lot here...

Chris, it's nice of you to finally post something!

From what I read into Chris' words, I'm wondering if perhaps he's checking into the fact that maybe Babe never did a radio show that day??

Ken

Still, the story could have gotten garbled over the years and the ticket/autograph could still be good.

I think that ultimately you have to verify that the ticket is legit, then decide whether or not the autograph is real. The first part can probably be done, but no one here ever seems to be in agreement as to whether or not a Ruth is real or not.

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

How much legwork was done? He claimed in his second post that it was bad yet at that time did not know it had been certed by JSA, believed it was rejected by PSA and I think we can tell from his posts that he believed that Heritage rejected it. Then claims that someone from Michigan who forged some other Ruth item that we are not allowed to see more than just the signature on also forged this Ruth ticket stub, yet the consignor is here and refutes all of that.

Dan

Speaking of MICHIGAN....GO BLUE!!!! Lets take a break to watch a great game fellas.