Babe Ruth Autographed Baseball Thoughts

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by niembre

Hello,
New to the forum. My wife's grandmother gave us this Babe Ruth autographed baseball. My wife's grandfather got the ball around 1936 from a president of a railroad company. He was around 12 years old. The ball has ES Barnard stamped on the side, so it dates to around 1929. The autograph does not look right to me though. I just do not understand why they would forge and autograph in the 30's. Could this be a clubhouse signature? All thoughts are welcomed.
Thanks

...since all thoughts are welcome. Let's assume the best - you are honest, your wife is honest. Unfortunately, with those assumptions, that means that your wife's grandfather is the blatant liar in the story. Let's go with that.

[niembre]

Originally Posted by Runscott

...since all thoughts are welcome. Let's assume the best - you are honest, your wife is honest. Unfortunately, with those assumptions, that means that your wife's grandfather is the blatant liar in the story. Let's go with that.

No need to lie about anything. He had to get the ball from somewhere during that time. I took the ball to antiques roadshow in Austin this past summer and the lady who looked at it also did not think that it was a real signature, but she was certain that the ink on the signature was from that time period (30's) She just told me that she is not an authenticator, but the signature did not look like a real ruth signature (which I agreed).

[RichardSimon]

That is some conclusion from the roadshow lady.
To analyze what era ink comes from costs a four figure sum and hours of lab work.
And just because it is old ink, does not mean it was signed in 1930's. Old ink is readily available now.

[niembre]

All I know is that the ball was sitting in the same hallway since at least the 1950's because my wife's mom has always known about that ball. It's not like it just showed up in the house within the past couple of years. They have no reason to lie about it and I am not on here saying that it is real, but the ball from that timeframe has to have some value, regardless of the signature.

[Klrdds]

After reading these posts I feel that you are looking for an opinion on 2 topics:
1. is this ball worth anything autographically speaking because of the bogus Ruth autograph that you know is bad and has a sketchy background at best, and
2. Now that the ball has been shown to have a bad Ruth auto with some questions about its history in the family you are now wanting to know if the ball alone has any value in spite of this bad Ruth autograph.
You now know that to this autograph forum the ball is essentially worth nothing. I would now recommend reposting this thread to the Vintage Memorabilia including Game Used Forum for their opinion based upon your ( the OP) last post where you wonder does this ball have any value at all even with the bad Ruth autograph. Just a recommendation to get both viewpoints as you clearly seem to want to do.