Why our autograph experts are often silent

[perezfan]

The 1926 Team Ball mentioned earlier is pictured about 3/4 of the way down on this link...

http://www.network54.com/Forum/56713...our+Collection

Of course there are subtle differences, as is always the case. I now have a migraine, and this used up all the available time I had tonight. So I will leave it to Scott and others to debate/nitpick/shoot down Keating/rip the seller/say that I'm an idiot/etc.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by perezfan

The 1926 Team Ball mentioned earlier is pictured about 3/4 of the way down on this link...

http://www.network54.com/Forum/56713...our+Collection

Of course there are subtle differences, as is always the case. I now have a migraine, and this used up all the available time I had tonight. So I will leave it to Scott and others to debate/nitpick/shoot down Keating/rip the seller/say that I'm an idiot/etc.

Mark, I didn't have much time either - just read the bottom part of your post.

The differences aren't subtle and it isn't a matter of nitpicking. Sure, they are subtle to some, which his why forgeries sell. And I would never call you an idiot or rip Keating - I respect you and have no reason not to respect Keating. I don't think my initial post inferred in any way that I had issues with Keating - I didn't actually believe it had been authenticated by Keating. The seller is another matter.

I've said this so many times on this forum that it probably doesn't need to be repeated, but there is no need to put words or thoughts in my mouth - I pretty much say what I think.

Edited to add: (image of 3 sigs at very bottom, for comparison). Rather than prolong this, I'm just adding to this last post. I've been searching for examples similar to the ebay one, and can't find any. Also, I would really like to see a better view of the pic that shows 5 views of the 1926 ball and clearer, larger pics of the other example. The Ruth signatures on the two examples you provided have a couple of distinct oddities that I also can't find examples of in authentic Ruth signatures;however, also can't find the characteristics in any forgeries. Doesn't mean they are bad, only that I can't find examples. And while PSA and JSA 'good' opinions don't mean much to me, their rejections are worth considering.

Although I stand by my assertions regarding the ebay example, I wouldn't touch any Ruth-signed item that doesn't look good - I would rather miss out on an authentic oddball example of a signature than end up with a $3,500 (or more) forgery. I'm very curious about the other signatures on the 1926 example.

Here's my favorite - classic Ruth signature that leaves no doubts, and a perfect exemplar to compare possible purchase to: