Thoughts on a Dizzy Dean...

[thetruthisoutthere]

Definitely not authentic.

[gashouse34]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Definitely not authentic.

Do you think this is a non malicious clubhouse?

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by gashousegang_1

Do you think this is a non malicious clubhouse?

No. I believe it is 100% authentic. Chris and JoeD are the ones who feel it to be "not authentic".

[gashouse34]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Definitely not authentic.

Originally Posted by jgmp123

No. I believe it is 100% authentic. Chris and JoeD are the ones who feel it to be "not authentic".

Not directed at you James. Was wondering what Chris' thoughts were.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by gashousegang_1

Do you think this is a non malicious clubhouse?

Just a sloppy forgery.

Clubhouse? Possibly.

[jgmp123]

Chris,

I just don't see the obvious "just a sloppy forgery" that you do...and a number of others here feel it to be authentic as well.

Is that really all you can say? "Just a sloppy forgery"??

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by jgmp123

Chris,

I just don't see the obvious "just a sloppy forgery" that you do...and a number of others here feel it to be authentic as well.

Is that really all you can say? "Just a sloppy forgery"??

Chris has never seen a good forgery. Most of the time, they're "horrific." Doesn't matter how good it is, doesn't matter if it's genuine. If Chris doesn't like it, it's horrific.

If Jim says it's good, it's good.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by jgmp123

Chris,

I just don't see the obvious "just a sloppy forgery" that you do...and a number of others here feel it to be authentic as well.

Is that really all you can say? "Just a sloppy forgery"??

James, you shouldn't have posted your Dizzy Dean if you didn't want anyone to opine on it.

The moment I looked at it I said to myself "definitely not Dizzy's sig."

[RCMcKenzie]

www.ebay.com/itm/120617222137

I think the signature is fairly consistent with the handwriting style seen on countless examples that you see. The OP's example does not have the typical apostophies flair, which you would think someone who could mimick the handwriting style would include.

[Runscott]

More experienced forum members have taught me that autographs can 'evolve', and I have never paid attention to Dizzy Dean;however, the double-line on the first 'D', and the hesitation and dips in the tops both 'D's would bother me. As with the weird Walter Johnson we discussed here, I would ask for an exemplar that showed these same supposedly 'early Dizzy' characteristics. If it is legit, they should be easy to find.

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

www.ebay.com/itm/120617222137

I think the signature is fairly consistent with the handwriting style seen on countless examples that you see. The OP's example does not have the typical apostophies flair, which you would think someone who could mimick the handwriting style would include.

This is also from 1942. Dizzys signature changed after 1938...hopefully Jim or Richard can add some light to this...

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

www.ebay.com/itm/120617222137

I think the signature is fairly consistent with the handwriting style seen on countless examples that you see. The OP's example does not have the typical apostophies flair, which you would think someone who could mimick the handwriting style would include.

I also believe the below Dizzy is a secretarial:

Dean-Sec.JPG

The OP's Dizzy is simply not authentic:


Dean-Forgery.JPG

[Michael B]

Disclaimer: I am no expert in baseball HOF'er signatures. I recall seeing a few Dean's in person years ago and may have owned an index card or such signature in the mid 1980's. My greatest knowledge is Olympians, especially early ones.

I looked at it before reading any of the comments, which I usually do, to see if I can tell. At least half the time on these I am incorrect. There were several things that struck me as odd about this one. First is the downstroke on the first ‘D’. It was done twice, though what appears to be the first one would have given it a large loop. Also, as the loop goes over the top and approaches the top of the downstroke the line dips and there is also a stop, barely perceptible, but seems to be there. That loop also does not look smooth, but done slowly and thought out.

There is something about the tail of the ‘y’ that strikes me as odd, but that may just be me.

There is also something about the second ‘D’ that seems odd. There is a dip in the top of the loop just past the start of the first downstroke that looks like some hesitation. Also, that back part of the ‘D’ reminds me of the crystal skull in ‘Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull’. It seems that he had a signature with a lot of flair, but looks like someone was trying to copy it and could not.

As I said in the beginning: No expert on HOFers, but this is how I learn so please be kind. I usually just read the comments. Thought I would offer a perspective on this one.

[jgmp123]

Thanks Michael. I will say again that this was a young Dizzy (28 years old) and should not be compared to his later signatures. The autograph has been verified as authentic by both Richard and Jim. I trust both of their knowledge and opinions.

Thanks,
James

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by jgmp123

Thanks Michael. I will say again that this was a young Dizzy (28 years old) and should not be compared to his later signatures. The autograph has been verified as authentic by both Richard and Jim. I trust both of their knowledge and opinions.

Thanks,
James

Jim,

I respect that and I don't doubt the authenticity. I also trust and respect the opinion of both Richard and Jim S. I just looked at the signature and thought 'Why would I not like it?'. It was more a mental exercise than anything else which is why I had the disclaimer at the beginning and end.

It is always great to find a vintage signature of an athlete signed during their career. I just picked up an autograph album with a 1956 Bill Russell and was quite pleased to get it for what I believe to be a bargain.

Cheers,
Michael

[ss]

IMO, it is very consistent with his early to mid 30's style. My guess is the shakiness in the signature is the result of how it was signed, not who signed it.

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Definitely not authentic.

Chris,

What's your reasoning? I have been told by two highly respected authenticators that it is 100% authentic....and no Travis, it wasn't PSA and JSA.