Authentic or Fake? You be the judge

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Nice find Chris,,, I think I know who actually signed that sheet.

Richard:

In the past you've made some allusions to possibly knowing the source of some of the forgeries and it seems as if some others here are in the know as well (a reference to Florida, if I recall correctly).

I understand why you wouldn't publicly name names based on suspicion only.

Just curious... would the suspect(s) be names we'd recognize?

[slidekellyslide]

Why the sudden silence Frank? You've checked in on this thread at least twice in the last two days, but haven't answered any of the questions posed to you. It's hard to take you seriously about your concern with fraud in the autograph industry now that you've gone silent.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Why the sudden silence Frank? You've checked in on this thread at least twice in the last two days, but haven't answered any of the questions posed to you. It's hard to take you seriously about your concern with fraud in the autograph industry now that you've gone silent.

It's interesting, too, that Frank writing that he has 25 years collecting experience, that he didn't raise an eyebrow when offered a total of 13 (17 if you want to count the that he claimed he already sold) Matty cut sigs and over 40 Babe Ruth cut sigs, and he sure didn't blink an eye when shelling out the cash to pay for those cut sigs.

[David Atkatz]

Don't be so sure he shelled out any cash.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Don't be so sure he shelled out any cash.

Hmmmm.

Consignment?

[David Atkatz]

That, or partner.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Hmmmm.

Consignment?

No, confakement

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

No, confakement

Chuck, my buddy, you always make me laugh....

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

Richard:

In the past you've made some allusions to possibly knowing the source of some of the forgeries and it seems as if some others here are in the know as well (a reference to Florida, if I recall correctly).

I understand why you wouldn't publicly name names based on suspicion only.

Just curious... would the suspect(s) be names we'd recognize?

In this particular instance, probably not.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Presently on Coach's Corner Auctions (Sept. 2011 Auction). Six (6) Derek Jeter autographed baseballs authenticated by Mr. Priddy (ACE). Poor forgeries.

There are presently over 100 listings on the Roach's Corner auction site that are ACE certified. Over 80% of those auction listing do not include a photograph. Think about that.

http://www.myccsa.com/Lot.aspx?LotID=283371

ACE-6.jpg

[thetruthisoutthere]

Authenticated by Justin Priddy (ACE) and Mike Baker. Interesting check with Babe Ruth's signature GH Ruth on the back.

1-12.jpg

1-20.jpg

1-21.jpg

[David Atkatz]

See the way the ink is "feathered" on the Ruth signature? That's what happens when you write with a fountain pen on old paper. See how the fountain pen writing on the front of the check is not feathered? That's 'cause it was written before the paper had aged for fifty-or-so years.

A good forgery, but a forgery nonetheless.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

See the way the ink is "feathered" on the Ruth signature? That's what happens when you write with a fountain pen on old paper. See how the fountain pen writing on the front of the check is not feathered? That's 'cause it was written before the paper had aged for fifty-or-so years.

A good forgery, but a forgery nonetheless.

Absolutely. 100% forgery.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

See the way the ink is "feathered" on the Ruth signature? That's what happens when you write with a fountain pen on old paper. See how the fountain pen writing on the front of the check is not feathered? That's 'cause it was written before the paper had aged for fifty-or-so years.

A good forgery, but a forgery nonetheless.

It's small, but it appears the ink is feathered on the front as well. Look at the 5 in 45 of the year.

Could this be a case of someone finding an old unused checkbook and faking everything, including the bank marks and holes?

[David Atkatz]

After my posting, I looked at the photo more closely, and changed my mind.
There is some feathering on the front, and I believe you're right, Steve. It's likely that the whole thing is a contemporary creation using an old blank check.

[Big Dave]

"See the way the ink is "feathered" on the Ruth signature? That's what happens when you write with a fountain pen on old paper. See how the fountain pen writing on the front of the check is not feathered? That's 'cause it was written before the paper had aged for fifty-or-so years. A good forgery, but a forgery nonetheless."

Looks like the same thing happened here.