Double X (Foxx) and Mantle Opinions

[ATP]

Originally Posted by shelly

What year do you think this mantle was done.

1970's

[shelly]

ft.jpg look at the two m's

[ATP]

I think it's similar to the era of this example, even though this is a stacked one. Hopefully I can get this to post correctly from my iPad.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by ATP

1970's

Please look at picture from Scott. This is a club house signature. I was trying to show that a vintage signature of Mantle is not from the Seventies. From around 68 on was the signature we see the most.
In regards to the cut that started this all my opinion stands.

[MikeKam]

Originally Posted by shelly

This is a vintage Mantle signature not the 70's My bottom lineon the cut.

Attachment 171421

That's a much earlier signature than the 1970s.

FWIW, I think its good.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by MikeKam

That's a much earlier signature than the 1970s.

FWIW, I think its good.

Mike I was trying to show that a 70 autograph was his modern autograph not vintage.
Which autograph do you think is good.

[MikeKam]

Originally Posted by shelly

Mike I was trying to show that a 70 autograph was his modern autograph not vintage.
Which autograph do you think is good.

The one in the OP.

[ATP]

Originally Posted by shelly

This is a vintage Mantle signature not the 70's My bottom lineon the cut.

Attachment 171421

Hi Shelly, I am looking at this on my phone, but I am pretty certain that the example you posted is a clubhouse of mantle from the 1960's, so no it wouldn't look anything like the one the OP is asking about :-)

[shelly]

Originally Posted by ATP

Hi Shelly, I am looking at this on my phone, but I am pretty certain that the example you posted is a clubhouse of mantle from the 1960's, so no it wouldn't look anything like the one the OP is asking about :-)

Sorry posted wrong ball it is a clubhouse.

[ATP]

Here's one that I think would be from the same era as the OP one style wise, probably a little more current.

[Runscott]

The last one Shelly posted was an error - here is a vintage example Shelly asked me to post for him - a true vintage Mantle. 1970's was not vintage.

And Jeff - Shelly says: "Good eyes, Jeff - very well-done".

[ATP]

Originally Posted by Runscott

The last one Shelly posted was an error - here is a vintage example Shelly asked me to post for him - a true vintage Mantle. 1970's was not vintage.

And Jeff - Shelly says: "Good eyes, Jeff - very well-done".

Thanks Shelly :-)

When I originally used the term vintage, I should have been more specific, I meant 1970's all along. To me that is somewhat vintage :-) The examples I have had on balls from the early to about 1956 are drastically different. In my opinion, there are a ton of differences between his 1970 signature and the ones your see from the late 1980's and early 1990's too, like all the UDA ones. Mostly in the "K" but also other places. We may just have to agree to disagree on this one, just from what I can see in the scan I would probably be comfortable buying it.

[Runscott]

Jeff - email sent.

[shelly]

That is what makes this place fun. I would pass on it even if I thought it was authentic. Only because so many great cuts are out there that have no question to its being authentic.
Just for the fun of it. Can any of you that feel this item authentic. Please send two exemplars of anything Mickey signed that has the second M that high from the Mickey.

[ATP]

I think the M is pretty high on the signed 1960 card I posted earlier. I just doesn't stick out quite as much because it's stacked and there isn't nearly the gap between the M and the a. I will look later tonight and see what I can find.

[MikeKam]

Originally Posted by shelly

That is what makes this place fun. I would pass on it even if I thought it was authentic. Only because so many great cuts are out there that have no question to its being authentic.
Just for the fun of it. Can any of you that feel this item authentic. Please send two exemplars of anything Mickey signed that has the second M that high from the Mickey.

I've seen a good number of examples that have the second M higher than the "Mickey," don't see why this is a sticking point.