Is this Ruth real? JSA says yes

[khkco4bls]

And I still think its stamped

[packs]

I still don't see how you can differentiate between the printed stamping and the supposed written on signature. The stamping, along with the dot patterns in both the known stamp and supposed signature, look exactly the same to me. So if one is stamped the other is stamped.

[Duluth Eskimo]

Well, you could have looked at it in person and the National instead of "seeing" or "thinking". OR, you could have talked to Bryan yourself. I looked at the ball myself at the national and it is clearly different, but I guess you can have your own opinion.

[packs]

Well I admit I didn't travel to Chicago to look at this one particular baseball. What I have available to me is the auction photo and my eyes. To you, the stamping isn't similar? You don't see the same dot pattern in the signature and stamp?

[Duluth Eskimo]

I didn't say it doesn't appear similar, it does at first glance. I know the seller and he is a very honest person and I would give him the benefit of the doubt and did. I also looked with my own eyes and it is different. I don't think there's an issue.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by packs

You don't see the same dot pattern in the signature and stamp?

I am not offering an opinion on the authenticity of the signature. But the "dot pattern" is simply the grain of the leather. When the surface ink wears away, it still remains in the depressions. Thus, the dot pattern will be identical, and does not depend at all upon the way the ink was applied to the ball. Notice the dots in the Ruth signature below.

[etsmith]

The "Ruth" in the signature looks too sloppy to be stamped. Most of the Babe Ruth stamped signatures show every letter more clearly, don't they? The signature also shows signs of fading in parts of the lettering while the stamps on the ball are more even.

[David Atkatz]

As far as I know, there are no Ruth rubber-stamped signatures. Anyone have a photo?

[djson1]

So, is there a way to have something printed on the leather versus "stamped"? I also think this Ruth is not a real signature because of the size. Doesn't the signature appear to be small compared to the usual way Ruth signed? Unless this is a large ball.....that signature appears rather small and compact, which is why it seems printed or stamped on there.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Duluth Eskimo

...but I guess you can have your own opinion.

I applaud the refreshing change in Jason's way of thinking.

[packs]

Did anyone else see the ball at the National? I am not saying anything about the seller's reputation or honesty, I'm curious about opinions on what looks to be stamped and what doesn't. I have been unable so far to find another example of the "Youth's Lively" baseball. I found a catalog as early as 1929 advertising them for sale, but there is only an artist rendering and not a complete view of the baseball.

[Duluth Eskimo]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I applaud the refreshing change in Jason's way of thinking.

It's really a shame we didn't get to meet in person at the national.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Duluth Eskimo

It's really a shame we didn't get to meet in person at the national.

It really is. I hear you are pretty much just the same in real life.