1927 Yankees team ball forgery

[travrosty]

Provenance stories just cloud better judgment, all provenance stories do is push a questionable or bogus autograph over the edge to the good side. if it was dead on, no need for provenance, it only helps the so-so autographs gain legs when they shouldn't.

These companies are afraid to give 'no opinions' , or 'unable to authenticate' is what the problem is.

Halper had Ruth hair with provenance3 signed on an envelope by Ruth himself. That provenance really helped, didn't it? It probably pushed it over the edge from "who the heck can know for sure it's ruth hair', to 'well it must be good, it has ruth provenance.'

Provenance is only for the weak autographs. Only one million percent lock solid verifiable provenance helps, and that is almost zero percent of the provenance we see in these auction listings, and in those miniscule cases, the autograph stands up for itself anyway.

I would rather have a dead-on autograph with no provenance, than a shaky looking autograph with good provenance, because the provenance story will fall through way before the dead-on autograph will. Because when it comes down to it, you have to collect autographs, not stories or certs.

[David Atkatz]

You're wrong, Travis. Provenance is not BS stories. Provenance is, above all, verifiable. If it can't be proven that, for example, a piece actually did belong to the person or institution claimed (a photo of him with it, a museum or library stamp, etc.), then it ain't provenance. It's a BS story.

[RichardSimon]

Travs, I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Though autographs have to stand on their merits and I would certainly never let a provenance story sway me, I still think that provenance matters. It helps if you are a good BS detector and can tell when the provenance is BS.
Of course when I have the guy who forged the Black Sox items I showed above, the same one I believe who forged the 1927 Yankee baseball, when I have him in my apartment and he is trying to sell me stuff, his provenance meant nothing. He claimed to have a hobby store in Forest Hills and this stuff that he was trying to peddle "just walked into the store."
Someone else who used to post here used to say that to me also.

[David Atkatz]

Once again, provenance is not a story. Provenance is the verifiable history of an object; key word here being verifiable. An auction catalog, say, from the 1950s, in which an item appears, proves where that item was at that time. It thus could not have been forged, say, by someone who hadn't even been born then.

Again, provenance is not the word-of-mouth story that a seller tries to hand you. True or not, that's just a story.

Understand what provenance is, before you criticise.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Once again, provenance is not a story. Provenance is the verifiable history of an object; key word here being verifiable. An auction catalog, say, from the 1950s, in which an item appears, proves where that item was at that time. It thus could not have been forged, say, by someone who hadn't even been born then.

Again, provenance is not the word-of-mouth story that a seller tries to hand you. True or not, that's just a story.

Understand what provenance is, before you criticise.

Agreed. By definition provenance is provable history or chain of ownership.

[RichardSimon]

You are correct and the word of mouth story from the young man in my apartment was totally transparent to me and I knew his word of mouth was BS.
He never fooled me nor did his partner fool me when he tried to sell me that 1920's NY Giants ball.
I always judge the autographs on merit but I do find that most of the word of mouth stories I am told, ok I won't call it provenance, are more often than not believable. Certainly not always but more often than not.
I deal a lot with people outside the hobby and have found much success in dealing with them.
When I buy a Roger Maris signed photograph, and totally think the autograph is authentic, and the photo is inscribed To Yvonne who told me she worked in Maris' dentists office, and asked him for an autograph, and I make my payment to Yvonne G------, well, I tend to think that person's word of mouth story is true.

[batsballsbases]

Originally Posted by travrosty

Provenance stories just cloud better judgment, all provenance stories do is push a questionable or bogus autograph over the edge to the good side. if it was dead on, no need for provenance, it only helps the so-so autographs gain legs when they shouldn't.

These companies are afraid to give 'no opinions' , or 'unable to authenticate' is what the problem is.

Halper had Ruth hair with provenance3 signed on an envelope by Ruth himself. That provenance really helped, didn't it? It probably pushed it over the edge from "who the heck can know for sure it's ruth hair', to 'well it must be good, it has ruth provenance.'

Provenance is only for the weak autographs. Only one million percent lock solid verifiable provenance helps, and that is almost zero percent of the provenance we see in these auction listings, and in those miniscule cases, the autograph stands up for itself anyway.

I would rather have a dead-on autograph with no provenance, than a shaky looking autograph with good provenance, because the provenance story will fall through way before the dead-on autograph will. Because when it comes down to it, you have to collect autographs, not stories or certs.

I have to agree with the rest provenance is a very important aspect of an item. Sometimes provenance is more important to me than Most of the experts put together. "if it was dead on" as you say dead on to who an autograph expert where it has already been proven time and time again that even the best at the game can and will continue to be fooled at the expense of the poor person who is willing to put down hard earned money on the word of a So called expert! Please as I have said time and time again unless you were there when the item was signed it is impossible to say with 100% certainty that the item was signed by the person who signed it. And that my friend is the real truth.

[David Atkatz]

It may not be possible to say with 100% certainty. But it is possible to say, at times, with, oh, 99.5% certainty. That's good enough for most.

[slidekellyslide]

Hey guys, a simple request - Stop using swear words. Thanks.

[batsballsbases]

David my friend and you know you are 99.5% might be a good average to hang your hat on but that .5% ended up costing you alot of money!

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

David my friend and you know you are 99.5% might be a good average to hang your hat on but that .5% ended up costing you alot of money!

True enough! But that's the risk any collector, of any collectable, takes.

[barrysloate]

With any transaction the buyer must utilize as much information as possible, and provenance is a very important tool, in some cases the most important. But Travrosty makes a good point that every bad piece will have a story to go with it. So it's important to assess and verify provenance. Having someone say, I know it's old because I bought it from an antique dealer is not acceptable provenance. But there are some very great pieces that have resided with families for generations, and the story behind them may be a critical piece of the whole puzzle.

[David Atkatz]

It's not just "not acceptable provenance," Barry. It's not provenance at all.

In the fine art world, the key element in passing a forgery is manufacturing a provenance. That is not making up a convincing story, it is physically manufacturing a paper trail that "proves" the piece's age and history.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Hey guys, a simple request - Stop using swear words. Thanks.

Sorry Dan, I thought that particular word was acceptable.
Would you want me to go back and soften it up?

[slidekellyslide]

I think I changed most of them to BS already. Not a real big deal and normally I'd gloss over it, but a thread on the other side turned nasty that I had to clean up a bit and I'd like to be consistent.

Thanks.

[batsballsbases]

Yes Richard please control yourself. Dont make me reach thru my computer screen and give you a slap!

[barrysloate]

Provenance is not an exact science. Usually the very best provenance is finding something that has been with a single family for a long time, say a ball Babe Ruth signed in the 1940's, or a Beatles signature from 1964, that has never been on the market ever, and you become the very first owner after the original family. But even that is based upon feeling confidant that the family isn't lying. And sometimes they do lie. Good judgment and common sense is important.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

Yes Richard please control yourself. Dont make me reach thru my computer screen and give you a slap!

Al,
It would be easier for you to reach over and slap my son, he lives in CT too.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by batsballsbases

Please as I have said time and time again unless you were there when the item was signed it is impossible to say with 100% certainty that the item was signed by the person who signed it. And that my friend is the real truth.

That holds for all "collectables," not just autographs. Can anyone prove, with 100% certainty, that the 1934 Goudey Gehrig in front of me is real? Can it be proven that someone hasn't figured out how to just-about-perfectly counterfeit Goudeys? It ain't likely, but it can't be 100% ruled out.