Shoeless Joe Jackson Auto- Fake?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

That's really not how things are supposed to be done though. And I think that's my issue overall with this piece. Provenance should not matter one iota when it comes to authentication. We are all conditioned not to believe grandpa's attic story. It should either be authentic or not authentic or an opinion can't be rendered and that conclusion should be made based on what you're looking at.

So if there was a film of Jackson signing it you would disregard that because provenance is irrelevant? OK. Does your view also apply to all forms of memorabilia or just autographs?

[Republicaninmass]

Oh well if he was illiterate, his signature would likely change size and shape every time. Abnormally so if he had to really concentrate.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So if there was a film of Jackson signing it you would disregard that because provenance is irrelevant? OK. Does your view also apply to all forms of memorabilia or just autographs?

Just autographs. And no, a video wouldn't suffice. That would be a pretty easy way to scam people, no?

But the same issues with weighing provenance plague memorabilia. I remember someone telling a story about a player selling milestone home run balls two or three times over saying a different ball was the home run ball every time. They were supposed to be real because of the provenance. But they weren't.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

Just autographs. And no, a video wouldn't suffice. That would be a pretty easy way to scam people, no?

But the same issues with weighing provenance plague memorabilia. I remember someone telling a story about a player selling milestone home run balls two or three times over saying a different ball was the home run ball every time. They were supposed to be real because of the provenance. But they weren't.

As we've seen, at least sometimes authenticating a signature is not always perfectly straightforward. It seems to me to be crazy to say provenance is always irrelevant. Sure, it may not be conclusive, it may be flawed, but surely it should be considered when available and given whatever weight is appropriate. The fact that you can identify an example of bad provenance doesn't argue for throwing out all provenance IMO.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by packs

Just autographs. And no, a video wouldn't suffice. That would be a pretty easy way to scam people, no?

But the same issues with weighing provenance plague memorabilia. I remember someone telling a story about a player selling milestone home run balls two or three times over saying a different ball was the home run ball every time. They were supposed to be real because of the provenance. But they weren't.

I don't recall home run balls, but I had heard that about Pete Rose and bats from a bunch of hits leading up to the record.

Home run balls wouldn't be impossible though, and it wouldn't surprise me.