Why our autograph experts are often silent

[Runscott]

Adam, good questions. In the seller's defense, he apparently only uses Keating - he also has a Greenberg card and a Spalding book for sale, both with Keating letters. I didn't look closely at Greenberg, but the Spalding looks good and it's a rather expensive autograph. I suspect that the Ruth autograph either has already failed PSA and/or JSA, or would if presented to them; hence, inappropriate for sale by any auction house.

As a sidenote, without the benefit of Mark's knowledge of the seller, I initially responded to him as I would anyone on ebay selling such a signature. After Mark posted that the seller was reputable, respecting Mark's opinion, I immediately contacted the seller with an apology. I know - unbelievable. All I will say is that any time someone refuses to accept a sincere apology, I write them off and at that point have zero respect for them until proven otherwise. So that was one-half of my research.

After reading Hank's response regarding Keating, who I only knew through a couple of interactions at the National and the autographs he was selling at his table, I googled him and learned everything additional I needed to know. Research completed and I have nothing else to say about either of the two people associated with this ball.

Regarding the ball itself - I ask again: $3,500 ebay price for a single-signed Ruth ball with a respected LOA? Why is it still available at such a steal?

[Econteachert205]

Unfortunately I think the ball is one which will engender no unanimity among experts.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

Unfortunately I think the ball is one which will engender no unanimity among experts.

It might, actually, but the results are not going to show up here.

[packs]

I feel like for $3,500 you could get a way nicer Ruth signature if you're looking to fill a void in your collection. Even if authentic it doesn't present well for that price.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

I feel like for $3,500 you could get a way nicer Ruth signature if you're looking to fill a void in your collection. Even if authentic it doesn't present well for that price.

I was factoring in the 'ebay offer' final price, but you might be correct.

[David Atkatz]

I hate baseballs like this. I am not happy at all with the characteristics of the signature. That said, I am very impressed with the baseball itself. It is an old ball, and certainly looks like it was shellacked a very long time ago--it takes a long time for shellac to yellow like that, I believe. Could it be a very old forgery? I doubt it. Ruth's autograph was just not very valuable then. And, while we have examples of secretarially signed balls--we know the patterns--I am not aware of any truly old forgeries.

So, I am unable to render an opinion.
But, I would not buy the ball.