Poll: Is this Cobb legit, or is it a "rotten peach"?

[perezfan]

Agree.... no doubt that it's a blatant reproduction.

[HexsHeroes]

.

. . . and having more time to kill than I should, I imported both Cobb autographs (Ron Keurajian's & donovan's) into an Excel spreadsheet. I oriented both autographs to exactly the same plane, and sized both to the same height and length specs. Then I placed donovan's example directly below Keurajian's, so that the beginning and end of both signatures were on the same vertical planes. I then copied the image of donovan's example, and pasted it to the right of Keurajian's (both on the same horizontal planes).

Then, using perfectly vertical lines that extended over both top & bottom examples, I touched over 25 common points. And the contact points one just about every single vertical line matched on the two signatures. So obviously, one was a reproduced copy of the other, right? I mean, no ones signature matches exactly (especially nearly 25 different contact points). So it would seem plausible that use of perfectly horizontal lines over both sigatures should produce the same common contact points, right?

Well, that's what I expected, but that's not what happened. Of the twenty five horizontal lines, only six contact points matched exactly. And there were a number of obvious misses.

So how could so many vertical contacts match, but not horizontal contacts?

If I get a chance, I'll try to post an image of my "experiment".

I personally don't know, but hazard to guess that the technologies used to create the two source images may not create perfectly true representations.

Anyone else have an idea ?

[travrosty]

it's obviously the same reproduced autograph in my opinion,

what is probably happening is that because the slabbed one is under a slab it is probably not being reproduced on our computer screens exactly as it appears in person as well as being a little blurry. It is not a very good scan like ron's scan is and the scan was taken with some thick plastic in the way instead of paper right up against the scanner like I assume Ron's was.

Ron's example was posted online and that's probably where it was grabbed from. If someone was smart, they would have manipulated the scan, stretch it slightly one way, then another to make it look slightly different, but most people don't take the time to do that, they scan and print.


I have seen autographs that I had to do a double take before, they look the same, but it didn't take long to find some small differences to convince me they were not exactly the same autograph. You can't reproduce your autograph two times in a row exactly like that. It's not physically possible and if anyone can show me two the same from any other athlete, I would really like to see it.


but please post your findings, it's interesting and welcome.

[packs]

This is like watching people argue over the moon landing.

Full disclosure: I don't think we ever went to the moon.

[yanks12025]

Originally Posted by packs

This is like watching people argue over the moon landing.

Full disclosure: I don't think we ever went to the moon.

Off-topic..

But why do people not believe we went to the moon.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by yanks12025

Off-topic..

But why do people not believe we went to the moon.

Some people are conspiracy minded for whatever reason. Maybe they need to think "bigger things" are going on beneath the surface and things are not what they seem.

The moon hoaxers (as well as the 911 truthers, etc.) have been debunked on every possible scientific level. But they will always counter with some "evidence" from some web site or whatever. I learned long ago there is no sense debating them.

[packs]

Everyone's got an opinion.