Babe Ruth - Good or Bad?

[Bpm0014]

He still had plenty of room to make a typical "E" in "Babe" though. Not sure why out of a million autographs, he changed it one time....

[MooseDog]

I hesitate to get involved in these mud-slinging contests, but when it comes to actually collecting autographs, how an item presents is very important, similar to what centering and corner condition mean to a card collector.

Personally, I don't want atypical signatures in my collection. Generally I don't like "rushed" signatures either.

Certainly there are cases where rarity supersedes what a signature looks like if you are say, filling a hole in team collection or something like that.

But in the case of Ruth, his autograph can be considered common, if expensive. If you have the money, you can pretty much buy one any day of the week.

I wouldn't want that ball in my collection at any price regardless of the TPA paperwork included.

[mr2686]

Originally Posted by MooseDog

I hesitate to get involved in these mud-slinging contests, but when it comes to actually collecting autographs, how an item presents is very important, similar to what centering and corner condition mean to a card collector.

Personally, I don't want atypical signatures in my collection. Generally I don't like "rushed" signatures either.

Certainly there are cases where rarity supersedes what a signature looks like if you are say, filling a hole in team collection or something like that.

But in the case of Ruth, his autograph can be considered common, if expensive. If you have the money, you can pretty much buy one any day of the week.

I wouldn't want that ball in my collection at any price regardless of the TPA paperwork included.

Well said.

[prewarsports]

This is exactly what I was refering to in the Gehrig thread last week. People show a picture and ask for opinions and then are shocked when people dont line up to answer. WE ALL KNOW what is going to follow, a "certified" example and then people start arguing. If you ever say anything in these threads "look fine", you are setting yourself up to be blasted as either agreeing with the authentication companies and looking like a fool, or being incompetant so what is the point.

Threads like this serve no purpose, its not going to sway anyones opinion either way and just feeds that drama that is killing this autograph forum in my opinion.

The "what do you think of this" threads used to be real questions about uncertified autographs and actually be fun to try and help people out. Now they are just tools for the self serving with an agenda.

Just an opinion from someone who sees less of a reason to go on this forum each and every day.

Rhys

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by prewarsports

This is exactly what I was refering to in the Gehrig thread last week. People show a picture and ask for opinions and then are shocked when people dont line up to answer. WE ALL KNOW what is going to follow, a "certified" example and then people start arguing. If you ever say anything in these threads "look fine", you are setting yourself up to be blasted as either agreeing with the authentication companies and looking like a fool, or being incompetant so what is the point.

Threads like this serve no purpose, its not going to sway anyones opinion either way and just feeds that drama that is killing this autograph forum in my opinion.

The "what do you think of this" threads used to be real questions about uncertified autographs and actually be fun to try and help people out. Now they are just tools for the self serving with an agenda.

Just an opinion from someone who sees less of a reason to go on this forum each and every day.

Rhys

Rhys, no offense, but you need to get one of those 'half full' glasses. This is a discussion forum for autographs, and that's what we are doing. Sure, there are agendas, but that's always been true.

This thread, in my opinion, is a great one - it shows what is probably an atypical Ruth autograph that most of us wouldn't touch. Because of this thread we are finding out why it might be real, and why the TPA's think that it is.

We've seen a great post by someone pointing out that even if it IS real, he wouldn't want to own it. This is an aspect of collecting that many board member have completely missed - we concentrate on authenticity (which most of the time can NOT be proven), and skip 'desirability'.

I don't mind being told I can't curse, but being told I can't express a negative opinion about something that does rankle me a bit.

And in terms of where the autograph forum has gone, it used to be that you couldn't even have two dissenting opinions in the same 'room'. I think that with a few exceptions, it's come a long way. And even those 'exceptions' seem to be under control.

Just my opinion - hope to see you at the National

[David Atkatz]

Agree with all you have posted above, Scott.

However, the entire baseball, inscription and all, should have been posted from the start.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Agree with all you have posted above, Scott.

However, the entire baseball, inscription and all, should have been posted from the start.

I keep forgetting - this was a 'got ya' thread

I forgot to get got