Little Red Riding Hood & Her Babe Ruth Signed 700th Homerun Day Ticket

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Is it against the rules to ask you how you know the ticket and Gaedel forgery are signed by the same person? That's the only pertinent question in regards to this post

None of the fluff you wrote about the ticket and how it was reportedly signed even matters here. The provenance is hearsay, we know that. The consignor says the lady was in her 70's...she could have been older, do you know how old a lady is by looking at her? Ticket stubs can be rare as most people didn't keep them in the 1930s, even from historic games. The condition of the ticket stub is irrelevant.

this is exactly right, i will translate chris' post.

fluff,

here is a gaedel i believe to be signed by the same hand.

fluff.

i agree with slidekellyslide, is it illegal to ask how the ruth and gaedel are signed by the same person? that's all that matters. you dragged an auction house and two authentication companies into a mud pit because of ?

so you don't believe the backstory, so what? the backstory doesn't make the ticket real nor does it make it fake. you are short on facts and hard evidence so you belittle the backstory. the backstory means nothing to me, but evidence does. do you have any? When someone spends that much time making fun of the backstory, means they got what? for proof? If you had some, you wouldn't even bother mentioning the backstory, as PROOF trumps all.

[David Atkatz]

Every single occurrence, when looked at individually, is highly unlikely.

Consider the chain of events that had to occur in order to bring your parents together. One improbability after another.

And yet, we're all here.

(One of us, though, as my father used to say, is ''not all there.")

[HRBAKER]

We still have assertions presented as fact (Ruth = Gaedel). Absent supporting proof we're really still @ he said/she said IMO.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

We still have assertions presented as fact (Ruth = Gaedel). Absent supporting proof we're really still @ he said/she said IMO.

why doesnt chris prove that the ruth signed ticket and the gaedel and the other ruth he showed are by the same hand. can you elaborate, mr. chris?

[D. Bergin]

Aside from the autograph, I think Chris is expressing doubt here, that this ticket is even from the correct game, because the only thing signifying the game is a date stamp.

There's also a Ted Williams 500 HR Rain Check Stub in the same auction with a hand-applied date stamp.

Maybe the ticket guys can chime in here, but I handled a large collection of baseball and other sports tickets a couple years ago and did not find a single rain check stub that was hand date-stamped.

There aren't press photos, I don't think it was common practice to hand-stamp the dates of this portion of the ticket at games. Somebody feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Aside from the autograph, I think Chris is expressing doubt here, that this ticket is even from the correct game, because the only thing signifying the game is a date stamp.

There's also a Ted Williams 500 HR Rain Check Stub in the same auction with a hand-applied date stamp.

Maybe the ticket guys can chime in here, but I handled a large collection of baseball and other sports tickets a couple years ago and did not find a single rain check stub that was hand date-stamped.

There aren't press photos, I don't think it was common practice to hand-stamp the dates of this portion of the ticket at games. Somebody feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

I also have a question. Did the Tigers change there rain check tickets every year. Or did they just stamp the same kind of ticket?

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by shelly

I also have a question. Did the Tigers change there rain check tickets every year. Or did they just stamp the same kind of ticket?

Shelly,
The "Babe Ruth signed 700 HR ticket" most likely had the year 1934 printed (not stamped) in the disclaimer text at the bottom of the stub, which was the way Tigers tickets were printed in the mid-late 1930's. The auction of similar 1934 tickets that Lance Fittro posted in the original thread clearly showed this.

As I stated before, it was unusual for Detroit to stamp the date of games on Emergency tickets in the earlier years, FWIW.

[shelly]

Scott, I dont think it did. I think this was a generic ticket with no year or date. It was then stamped. I could be wrong but when I looked there was no year on the ticket that I could see.Ruthstub-1024x637.jpg

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by shelly

Scott, I dont think it did. I think this was a generic ticket with no year or date. It was then stamped. I could be wrong but when I looked there was no year on the ticket that I could see.Attachment 96765

Shelly,
Thanks for the close up scan.
The stub's tear is conveniently just above where the year 1934 would have appeared on the stub. To see an example of what I am talking about please refer to the Tigers 1934 eBay auction lot in the 1st Babe Ruth ticket thread.

[earlywynnfan]

Regarding the radio show, many shows had a live audience (often behind glass, so you couldn't hear them over the air.) Tickets to these would be given out beforehand, usually for free.

So a family is going to the big city to see a radio show, because they have tickets. While there, why not take in a baseball game? While at the station, who do we see, but Babe Ruth! And he's signing autographs for the crowd afterwards!! "Daddy, can I get his autograph? Sure, honey, but I don't have anything -- wait, have him sign my ticket stub."

Chris, I make no assertions about the whole of your post, but I think the scenario I just posted is extremely plausible. Once again, you have made a post with lots of sizzle and no steak. I look forward to you coming on again two weeks from now to clear this up a little.

Ken