Shoeless Joe Jackson Auto- Fake?

[SteveS]

They did know that it was up for auction as they said they would have bid on it had they felt it was real. Also, from what I can tell, they did not put out the initial tweet on the issue. Someone tweeted at them asking if the photo would be displayed at the museum at some point, and they responded to that with their opinion of it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Good day for PSA, between the Jackson and the Gehrig.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Good day for PSA, between the Jackson and the Gehrig.

Never get cheated! Never ever ever….

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Never get cheated! Never ever ever….

While they are maintaining their tradition of excellence, Orlando is long gone. The new regime had a chance to correct or catch their initial mistake of the 1926 Exhibit Gehrig and once again, balked, letting it go to market rather than correcting it.

Guys with deep pockets love buying illusions, it seems. And TPG is always there to deliver. I assume both of these debacles will remain in the hobby because after all, what do guys with opinions on hobby chat boards know about this kinda stuff? 0.0% chance PSA makes any effort to re-examine the Gehrig and the Jackson mistakes.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Ron Keurajian, the author of two volumes of “Baseball Hall of Fame Autographs: A Reference Guide” that also include signature analyses of players from the 1919 Chicago White Sox, said that there are “no genuine signed images of Jackson in existence.”

In its auction listing, Christie’s said the Jackson autograph is “the lone surviving example of any type.”

Keurajian said he was skeptical about the photograph’s authenticity.

“Here’s a guy who was illiterate, but he can write ‘Alexandria’ on the photograph?” Keurajian told Cox Media Group via telephone on Thursday night. “And for those who believe Frank Smith wrote ‘Alexandria’ on the photo, so, he wrote it in the same hand as Jackson’s? That seems highly unlikely.”

In his book, Keurajian describes Jackson’s signature as “rudimentary” and “very easy to replicate.”

[shagrotn77]

What's the story with the Gehrig you guys are talking about?

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by shagrotn77

What's the story with the Gehrig you guys are talking about?

More on this https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=308821 thread about the Gehrig

[ThomasL]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Ron Keurajian, the author of two volumes of “Baseball Hall of Fame Autographs: A Reference Guide” that also include signature analyses of players from the 1919 Chicago White Sox, said that there are “no genuine signed images of Jackson in existence.”

In its auction listing, Christie’s said the Jackson autograph is “the lone surviving example of any type.”

Keurajian said he was skeptical about the photograph’s authenticity.

“Here’s a guy who was illiterate, but he can write ‘Alexandria’ on the photograph?” Keurajian told Cox Media Group via telephone on Thursday night. “And for those who believe Frank Smith wrote ‘Alexandria’ on the photo, so, he wrote it in the same hand as Jackson’s? That seems highly unlikely.”

In his book, Keurajian describes Jackson’s signature as “rudimentary” and “very easy to replicate.”

This is the back bone...and if you question that it all was signed by the same hand (I dont)...go find me a large Joe Jackson signature like this or one with fluid smooth "J" formations on an actual JJ document even.

[bdangelo]

Those quotes from Ron Keurajian came from this story -- https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/t...G3MVBQL4JBXH4/

[drcy]

At $1.4 million, one could do expert ink analysis.

[ThomasL]

1. Every Jackson signature that is above question is on a document of some kind so yes there are many that are 100% authentic, they are all on documents.

2. As I said before all his real signatures are smaller than the average persons signature and this photo is very large

3. The photo itself has great providence...not the signature on it.

4. The Js on the photo are smooth and I have yet to find a JJ signed document where they are smoothly formed like these. Also very small/narrow top loops.

5. It seems very likely that the same hand wrote everything on that photo and Jackson 100% could not have done that.

6. He ended his signature almost always with a downward stroke and not an up stroke like on the photo

Jackson's real signatures are very consistent through out time and this photo is not consistent with them.

Im sure better experts can point out more issues but these are the ones I would point of.

Here are a few examples I threw together, these are not to scale as the 1911 photo is much larger than any of the others.
(also notice the change in Buck Weaver's signature from 1917 to 1920-21...his signature is a lot harder to judge if you ask me)
-1915 doc
-1911 photo
-1917 team signed document asking for WS bonus money
-1920-21 court document

[ThomasL]

Originally Posted by SteveS

They did know that it was up for auction as they said they would have bid on it had they felt it was real. Also, from what I can tell, they did not put out the initial tweet on the issue. Someone tweeted at them asking if the photo would be displayed at the museum at some point, and they responded to that with their opinion of it.

That could have just been a flippant remark as Im sure it was well past the point and extremely hard to get registered to bid in that auction (I dont know just guessing there)

That tweet reply I think was made around 8pm est last night and the auction was over or just about over by then (cant find the exact ending time for it) So yes in fact it is very possible they didnt know it was up for auction until it was too late and your example here that they did is based on an incorrect judgment and assumption.

I would suggest asking Dan directly if you are so curious...instead of trying to make an issue out of nothing here.

I would also add what would be the point anyway? This item has been questioned before and well known to be questionable and the previous time attempts to raise a question/issue about it didnt stop it from being sold so why would it this time?

[SteveS]

Oh, I'm not saying the museum did anything wrong. I mentioned above that they are not obligated to volunteer their opinion. And in fact, they didn't bring it up until someone tweeted at them. PSA gave its opinion, the museum gave its opinion, and it's up to the buyer to decide whether he's happy with his purchase.

[ThomasL]

Got ya,

also for anyone who is interest in reading what this board thought about it when it hit the market back in 2015 here is the thread

https://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=201313

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by SteveS

They did know that it was up for auction as they said they would have bid on it had they felt it was real. Also, from what I can tell, they did not put out the initial tweet on the issue. Someone tweeted at them asking if the photo would be displayed at the museum at some point, and they responded to that with their opinion of it.

I wonder if they kept quiet for legal reasons. Had they come out and declared it to be fake, it could've damaged the consignor to the tune of a million dollars. And then, how do they prove it's fake? Authenticators don't agree.

It reminds me of the situation a few years ago, when a well known AH which will remain nameless was offering a glove supposedly used by a very famous pre-war player, from his industrial school days. Some people opined the glove might not be authentic, and noted possible differences between the actual glove and the picture which supposedly photomatched it. As I recall, some people received, or were threatened with, cease and desist letters from attorneys.

Stating a high dollar item is fake could potentially end up in a messy situation it seems to me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

A statement of opinion is not defamatory. That said, the line between opinion and fact can be murky.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Mark17

I wonder if they kept quiet for legal reasons. Had they come out and declared it to be fake, it could've damaged the consignor to the tune of a million dollars. And then, how do they prove it's fake? Authenticators don't agree.

It reminds me of the situation a few years ago, when a well known AH which will remain nameless was offering a glove supposedly used by a very famous pre-war player, from his industrial school days. Some people opined the glove might not be authentic, and noted possible differences between the actual glove and the picture which supposedly photomatched it. As I recall, some people received, or were threatened with, cease and desist letters from attorneys.

Stating a high dollar item is fake could potentially end up in a messy situation it seems to me.

I don't know the laws that well but I would not back down from a Cease and Desist order if what I was stating was what I thought was the truth. Freedom of speech and all... but yes, no doubt anyone can sue anyone for almost anything.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Leon

I don't know the laws that well but I would not back down from a Cease and Desist order if what I was stating was what I thought was the truth. Freedom of speech and all... but yes, no doubt anyone can sue anyone for almost anything.

It is all how you word it. In my opinion it is fake is not something they can prevent you from saying.

[mrreality68]

WOW

So much intrigue and so much behind giving your opinion on it.

The reality is I hope the buyer knows what he is or is not doing related to the purchase and the aftermath of it.

For me I into Joe Jackson and his cards and such but I was never comfortable going after any of his autographs that I have seen.