Question for the experts

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

Textbook "Milkey Mautle" mass-produced fake.

From the bottom of the t in mantle all the way to the end of the e in mantle, you can basically draw a straight line along the baseline of those letters, a real mantle is more bouncy and not exactly straight like that. It's just one of the tells. In a real mantle the e in Mantle usually dips down below and the end of the e is usually shorter and doent tail way off to the right in a straight line and the line you can draw underneath those last three letters won't be exactly straight like i have shown here. Look how exactly straight that the red line is and it is perfectly underneath those letters. as a general rule, a real mantle isnt like that.

oops i just helped the forgers.

[13thinning2013]

Thanks Trav for the info on that.

[Mr. Zipper]

Thank you Travis for providing the line by line breakdown of an obvious, slowly drawn, malformed fake. You are truly an expert!

By the way, how's the analysis going on the Jim Corbett autograph someone posted a month ago? Been too busy breaking down documented Mantle forgery styles to get to it?

[shelly]

Now that I see the autograph I would have to say

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

Thank you Travis for providing the line by line breakdown of an obvious, slowly drawn, malformed fake. You are truly an expert!

By the way, how's the analysis going on the Jim Corbett autograph someone posted a month ago? Been too busy breaking down documented Mantle forgery styles to get to it?

Thank goodness for Travis.

That was hilarious, Mr. Zipper.

[shelly]

Not to be anything but kind. Travis, why would you ever leave the place that everyone trust you. Baseball to you is like Walt Disney to me.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by shelly

Not to be anything but kind. Travis, why would you ever leave the place that everyone trust you. Baseball to you is like Walt Disney to me.

so you are saying i am wrong then? okay prove it then.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

Thank you Travis for providing the line by line breakdown of an obvious, slowly drawn, malformed fake. You are truly an expert!

By the way, how's the analysis going on the Jim Corbett autograph someone posted a month ago? Been too busy breaking down documented Mantle forgery styles to get to it?

If it is obvious why do people keep posting them again and again asking for help on what to look for and for opinions on whether they are good or not?

I showed him something to look for and he thanked me for it. What's wrong with that? What did I do to get a response from you like that? Was my observation wrong?

[earlywynnfan]

Shelly and Steve, I have to say, his post was far more useful than the basic stamp of "Good" or "No Good" that many of you reply with.

Ken

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Shelly and Steve, I have to say, his post was far more useful than the basic stamp of "Good" or "No Good" that many of you reply with.

Ken

+1

[autograf]

To the OP.....don't just assume that now that you have an iPad and you can pull up a 'real', verified signature that you can quickly look at it and make an assumption. To the untrained eye, some of these forgeries are REALLY good--especially all the Mantle and Ted Williams ones. Things pointed out earlier are great identifying factors but unless you've spent a TON of time on these autographs it's not like it's second nature to look at an iPad screen, the physical item in front of you and assume you can make a quick decision......just my opinion.....

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by travrosty

If it is obvious why do people keep posting them again and again asking for help on what to look for and for opinions on whether they are good or not?

I showed him something to look for and he thanked me for it. What's wrong with that? What did I do to get a response from you like that? Was my observation wrong?

You were spot on in your analysis. You could have mentioned the drawn, heavy and labored appearance was a dead giveaway without even needing to bother with letter formation analysis, but to each his own.

By the way, how's the analysis going on the Jim Corbett autograph someone posted a month ago?

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

You were spot on in your analysis. You could have mentioned the drawn, heavy and labored appearance was a dead giveaway without even needing to bother with letter formation analysis, but to each his own.

By the way, how's the analysis going on the Jim Corbett autograph someone posted a month ago?

+1

[Paulanthony]

Originally Posted by travrosty

If it is obvious why do people keep posting them again and again asking for help on what to look for and for opinions on whether they are good or not?

I showed him something to look for and he thanked me for it. What's wrong with that? What did I do to get a response from you like that? Was my observation wrong?

The observation and explanation given is exactly how a bad autograph should be addressed. The no good answer or frown face does not contribute much to the hobby.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by 13thinning2013

Thanks Trav for the info on that.

you are welcome