Babe Ruth Ban Johnson Ball

[shelly]

It really makes very little difference if a ball has a club house signiture or a forged one. The bottom line is Ruth did not sign it thus makeing the ball worth more than the scribble that is on it.
Just my opinion.

[ATP]

I passed on it a few months ago because I knew it didn't look right one way or another, but to me, personally I do like to know if it might be clubhouse or outright forgery. I add them to my file and allows me to see trends, or patterns if forgery and I find that valuable information...but then again I am overly analytical of things.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by ATP

I passed on it a few months ago because I knew it didn't look right one way or another, but to me, personally I do like to know if it might be clubhouse or outright forgery. I add them to my file and allows me to see trends, or patterns if forgery and I find that valuable information...but then again I am overly analytical of things.

I think David Atkatz' post sums up the difference very well. People who signed as clubhouse or secretarial would not have had forgery skills, so it should be very obvious. Also, I have never heard of a single-signed clubhouse ball.

[ATP]

Good point, thank you.

[shelly]

Please answer this. If a ball has a single signed clubhouse signiture. Another ball has a single signed forgery of the same player is the clubhouse worth more.
I know that I have never seen a single signed clubhouse signiture but just asking .

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by shelly

Please answer this. If a ball has a single signed clubhouse signiture. Another ball has a single signed forgery of the same player is the clubhouse worth more.
I know that I have never seen a single signed clubhouse signiture but just asking .

Both are worth what you would pay to buy Fido a chew toy.

Keeping it more real, and along the same lines - if you have two 1927 Yankees balls, one with 20 real signatures and 2 forgeries (Ruth and Gehrig), and the other with 20 real signatures and 2 obvious clubhouse (Ruth and Gehrig), which is worth more? ...or is there no difference in value?

As a collector, the one with the forgeries would be much less appealing, primarily because the forgeries were not intended to be on the ball and are almost certainly much more recent. And they were used with the intent of screwing someone.

[ATP]

To me neither would be of interest or value to buy, to some the clubhouse might be worth something. I just wanted to know, for information purposes only, nothing at all to do with value.

[Nyygameused]

I go to a game, ask the ballboy if after the game he can get me an autograph. He proceeds after the game into the clubhouse and comes out with a signed baseball.

Assuming we have a "clubhouse" signature, while this baseball may mean the world to me not knowing it is a "clubhouse" sig. The story and feelings mean nothing, once it changes hands it's a forgery.

[David Atkatz]

No, it's not a forgery. There is precise terminology used by serious autograph collectors. It's used for a reason. Take the time to learn and understand it, and you may actually sound like you know what you're talking about.

[Nyygameused]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

No, it's not a forgery. There is precise terminology used by serious autograph collectors. It's used for a reason. Take the time to learn and understand it, and you may actually sound like you know what you're talking about.

David what is my autograph signed by anyone other than me considered? A fake, a fraud, not authentic, non genuine. If someone handed me a baseball and said hey I signed it with David's name so be happy, I'd say what? I understand what a clubhouse sig is, but I'm my opinion it is simply a forgery that came from within