Joe DiMaggio autograph. Authentic?????

[johnts1]

Asking for a friend. I personally think it's good. A little slow, but all the characteristic seem to be there. Thank you!!

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by johnts1

Asking for a friend. I personally think it's good. A little slow, but all the characteristic seem to be there. Thank you!!

Would need a closer photo.

[johnts1]

Hopefully this is better.

[shelly]

I sort of remember that the j was the giveaway

[joed25]

I think it’s real

[shelly]

well we have tie. Where is Chris or Steve?

[Hxcmilkshake]

Watch "TSN & W5 - Faking It (TSN Feature)" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/uw1kKGHxVhA

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[thetruthisoutthere]

I read this from the beginning and emailed my friend Steve Z. on Sept. 27th that my initial instinct was that it was authentic.

I also wrote Steve, that the photo posted was not a good image to opine from because "speed" is crucial to opining Joe DiMaggio's autograph.

I would still like to have it in my hands or have a better photo to opine 100%.

I would have commented earlier but I had my reasons why I didn't and Steve Z. knows why and we will keep that between us two.

Below is a side-by-side of one of my DiMaggio autographed baseballs and the one posted here.

Mine is on the right.

As you can observe, my DiMaggio shows more speed, but the other photo, which I attempted to enhance, does not show the same speed, but that could be because of the photo.



Net54DiMaggio2AndMyDiMaggio.JPG

[thetruthisoutthere]

I will also write, just to be clear, that I am not 100% that this DiMaggio is authentic.

The only way to be 100% would be to have it in my hands.

If Spence had it in their hands, they would have the advantage of a hands-on examination.

In my opinion, "no one is wrong here."

That photo posted by the OP is not strong enough to make a 100% yes or no decision, but my first instinct was authentic.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

I will also write, just to be clear, that I am not 100% that this DiMaggio is authentic.

The only way to be 100% would be to have it in my hands.

If Spence had it in their hands, they would have the advantage of a hands-on examination.

In my opinion, "no one is wrong here."

That photo posted by the OP is not strong enough to make a 100% yes or no decision, but my first instinct was authentic.

I agree, my first inkling is that it is authentic although the picture did not let me render an opinion, hence why I didn't chime in

When I was buying these (and I have 10), I'd take a chance on it up to 175 for the 300 ball until I had it in my fat hands... then if I didn't like it, I would send it back. If people are selling a 200-300 item and they can't give you a good pic, I would feed them fish heads.

[tlake22]

You can have all the Net54 opinions you like, but when it comes time to sell the ball , the only opinions that add value are the big 3.

[Mr. Zipper]

We get that it's en vogue to rip the TPAs here, but if we want to deal in FACTS and reality, they are going to get signers such as Mantle, Williams, and DiMaggio right an overwhelming majority of the time. Period.

[Mr. Zipper]

By the way, to the people who promote those "got ya" videos where they slide one fake by a TPA at a card show -- the forgers and scammers send their thanks. This is the kind of ammunition eBay scammers use to "prove" how bad the TPAs are whenever a credible authenticator rejects their garbage.

Keep up the good work!

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

By the way, to the people who promote those "got ya" videos where they slide one fake by a TPA at a card show -- the forgers and scammers send their thanks. This is the kind of ammunition eBay scammers use to "prove" how bad the TPAs are whenever a credible authenticator rejects their garbage.

Keep up the good work!

+1

[mr2686]

Ok, in all fairness they didn't slide one fake by them, it was 17...but that's neither here not there. Since I respect both Steve and Chris, I put this question to you, and that is you both have to admit there is definitely a couple of holes in the system. First, the whole take your autograph to a cardshow and have them authenticate it on the spot or get an in-person autograph at a show and take it over to a separate table to have a TPA put a sticker on it is flawed. Also, the number of submissions that some of these TPA's are accepting in a year makes it hard to give each autograph the proper time needed to authenticate them. I just think they cut corners and make assumptions based on workload.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by mr2686

Ok, in all fairness they didn't slide one fake by them, it was 17...but that's neither here not there. Since I respect both Steve and Chris, I put this question to you, and that is you both have to admit there is definitely a couple of holes in the system. First, the whole take your autograph to a cardshow and have them authenticate it on the spot or get an in-person autograph at a show and take it over to a separate table to have a TPA put a sticker on it is flawed. Also, the number of submissions that some of these TPA's are accepting in a year makes it hard to give each autograph the proper time needed to authenticate them. I just think they cut corners and make assumptions based on workload.

Valid points, Mike, and no doubt, that part of the system is imperfect and must be changed.

They make it too easy for that to happen.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by mr2686

Ok, in all fairness they didn't slide one fake by them, it was 17...but that's neither here not there. Since I respect both Steve and Chris, I put this question to you, and that is you both have to admit there is definitely a couple of holes in the system. First, the whole take your autograph to a cardshow and have them authenticate it on the spot or get an in-person autograph at a show and take it over to a separate table to have a TPA put a sticker on it is flawed. Also, the number of submissions that some of these TPA's are accepting in a year makes it hard to give each autograph the proper time needed to authenticate them. I just think they cut corners and make assumptions based on workload.

The system is not perfect and I am not excusing mistakes. And there is nothing wrong with fair criticism.

Chris has his pet peeves and one of mine are people posting links to these videos or one-sided bashing sites like it is supposed to be some great revelation or "the final word" on the matter.

I recently rejected a terrible Apollo 11 fake that was sold by one of these "tourist gallery" places that uses one of the usual crooked forensic authenticators.

When my client requested a refund based upon me rejecting the item, guess what the crooked seller did?

Yep... they sent my client a bunch of links to videos and articles just like this one to discredit authenticators. Discredit, smear and spread fake news. This is how forgery scammers operate. While the intent of some of these pieces may be honest, in reality they don't shed much light but are rather used as a tool by dishonest parties.

By the way, my client ended up getting a refund of the many thousands of dollars he spent on a worthless fake in a fancy frame.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

We get that it's en vogue to rip the TPAs here, but if we want to deal in FACTS and reality, they are going to get signers such as Mantle, Williams, and DiMaggio right an overwhelming majority of the time. Period.

Very true.