Roberto Clemente Signature "Bob"

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by G1911

It very well may be. I just don't know why we would ignore evidence to assume that. That doesn't make sense. Gil's claim is not this, that he liked one name from friends and another from the public. He says Roberto corrected "everyone". Other testimonies don't seem to mesh with this, the only piece of evidence found in favor of the general narrative.

Again, just go with evidence. That's it.




This has increasingly become a part of the Clemente legend as time has passed; I would guess because it fits with our cultural perspective in 2023 but I won't claim to know others thoughts without direct evidence. I buy whatever evidence shows, not whatever people say or like. I know that evidence, then conclusion, instead of the reverse, is a generally unpopular concept on the board.

You are biased just like every human. You just like to hide it in your talk about Aristotle, and reason. If I had a nickel for every time you used the phrase "Any claim to fact should have an evidentiary basis" while at the same time showing your biases, I could afford a '52 Mantle .

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You are biased just like every human. You just like to hide it in your talk about Aristotle, and reason. If I had a nickel for every time you used the phrase "Any claim to fact should have an evidentiary basis" while at the same time showing your biases, I could afford a '52 Mantle rookie.

Obviously every person has a bias - I have many of them. I claim we should separate statements of my opinions from claims to actual fact. I claim that we should provide evidence for a claim to fact. Feel free to point out a claim to fact here that is incorrect.

I think that claims to fact should be built on evidence, and that the research should be before the conclusion. You know, very basic logic of the middle school variety. I know that’s unpopular with people that prefer to not have an evidentiary basis or have to ascertain facts. I have never noticed a correlation between being correct and ignoring an evidentiary basis. If my biased dumb ass can handle basic logic, I’m sure you brilliant gentleman may do so as well.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by G1911

Obviously every person has a bias - I have many of them. I claim we should separate statements of my opinions from claims to actual fact. I claim that we should provide evidence for a claim to fact. Feel free to point out a claim to fact here that is incorrect.

I think that claims to fact should be built on evidence, and that the research should be before the conclusion. You know, very basic logic of the middle school variety. I know that’s unpopular with people that prefer to not have an evidentiary basis or have to ascertain facts. I have never noticed a correlation between being correct and ignoring an evidentiary basis. If my biased dumb ass can handle basic logic, I’m sure you brilliant gentleman may do so as well.

People hear stuff and read stuff and just repeat it without ever checking to see if its true. Nowhere is that more true than when it comes to 1919 Black Sox, people continually repeat the lies of the 8 Men Out book and movie. But thats a different discussion.

[EddieP]

Originally Posted by G1911

Obviously every person has a bias - I have many of them. I claim we should separate statements of my opinions from claims to actual fact. I claim that we should provide evidence for a claim to fact. Feel free to point out a claim to fact here that is incorrect.

I think that claims to fact should be built on evidence, and that the research should be before the conclusion. You know, very basic logic of the middle school variety. I know that’s unpopular with people that prefer to not have an evidentiary basis or have to ascertain facts. I have never noticed a correlation between being correct and ignoring an evidentiary basis. If my biased dumb ass can handle basic logic, I’m sure you brilliant gentleman may do so as well.

I’m glad you brought this up. One of the biggest myths on this Board is that “ears don’t change” when aging. This fallacy is used to ID players in photos (especially in comparing the photos of the younger player to his older shelf).

This is from WebMD:

“You may have heard that your nose and ears never stop growing. As you get older, you might notice that your nose looks bigger or your earlobes look longer than they did when you were younger. Is there any truth to the idea that they are still growing?

Your nose and ears indeed change as you get older, but it isn’t that they’re growing. Instead, what you’re seeing is the effects of skin changes and gravity. Other parts of your body change in the same ways, but your ears and nose are more visible and more noticeable.”

[EddieP]

The encyclopedia Britannica:

“ While Clemente amassed a mountain of impressive statistics during his career, he was often mocked by the print media in the United States for his heavy Spanish accent. Clemente was also subjected to the double discrimination of being a foreigner and being Black in a racially segregated society. Although the media tried to call him “Bob” or “Bobby” and many of his baseball cards use “Bob,” Clemente explicitly rejected those nicknames, stating in no uncertain terms that his name was Roberto.
There was also confusion over the correct form of his surname. For 27 years the plaque at the National Baseball Hall of Fame read “Roberto Walker Clemente,” mistakenly placing his mother’s maiden name before his father’s surname. Only in 2000 was it changed to its proper Latin American form, Roberto Clemente Walker.”

My $0.02 : Clemente suffered the Dick Allen Effect.

[EddieP]

Double post

[ALBB]

Yea, after looking at that sig again.. its looks like a lot more then just - b-o-b,..I think a rushed scribbled Roberto

[cgjackson222]

I'm pretty unconvinced by all of the supposed "Bob" Clemente signatures.

I think its pretty easy to forge a signature, and the memorabilia world is rife with fakes that have been identified as authentic by the "experts".

I am also unconvinced by the 1967 Topps card's supposed "Bob" Clemente signature. We are talking about a company that routinely airbrushed and tampered with photographs. At least one person doesn't even think it says Bob, but rather "Rob" which adds another wrinkle.

I am also unconvinced that Topps was overtly racist or had malevolent intentions in calling him Bob. On the back of both the '57 and '62 cards, for instance, he is referred to as Roberto. I think Topps calling him Bob was probably a sloppy oversight.

What we can say for certain, is that he unequivocally told the Press in 1955 that he wanted to be called Roberto Clemente (see post#34). Whether that changed later in his life, we may never know for sure.

[AndrewJerome]

This is a very interesting topic. The Topps usage and changes over time especially. Why would Topps unilaterally make the change to Bob without asking him? And why was the change made to Bob in the first place if no one called him Bob? Surely if he asked for a change back to Roberto, Topps would have made the change for him, right? Certainly for the year after he requested the change. Why would Topps refuse to use the name he wanted? I don’t buy the idea that he allowed “Bob” just so he had a card. There would be a card of him every year either way, why not have it be the name he wanted? And why was the change made to Bob in the first place if no one called him Bob? That’s the part I’m confused about. Some random, rogue Topps employee doing this and having it stick for years doesn’t logically make any sense.

On the flip side, no one calls me Andy, always Andrew my whole life. If I had a card, and it said Andy on it, my initial thought (now) would be like you gotta change that thing asap. Like yesterday. However, when I was a young kid 15 1/2 working my first job, they made a shirt for me that said “Andy” on it. They didn’t ask me, just printed it that way. And I wore it that way the entire time I worked there because I thought it was funny. So who knows!

I guess the threshold question to answer is: as a general matter, do we know what power players had over what exact name was put on a Topps card? And are there other players whose name/nickname changed on the front of their cards over the course of their Topps run?