Little Red Riding Hood & Her Babe Ruth Signed 700th Homerun Day Ticket

[mr2686]

I guess another question would be, even if he obtained it, it would have cost him an amount unusual for a forger to fork out considering he would only have one shot at creating such a convincing Ruth, so why not dummy up a fake ticket instead?

[David Atkatz]

I hope you realize, Mike, I was being a bit of a smartass.
Of board members that have spoken, a majority of those in the "98%," and even a few in the elite "2%" feel the signature is genuine.

All physical evidence is consistent with the ticket being genuine, as well.

I'm sure the buyer will be happy with his purchase.

[mr2686]

Yes I did David. I was just taking the point a litte further. I still stand by my first post in this thread that the OP had good info. I base that strictly on his previous posts that did not tell us anything that would help us determine why he felt the sig was bad. With this tread, we learned that he did not believe the story and why, and whether we agree with all of it or not, it did start a very interesting ticket investigation on this very thread. The other part was to compare the Ruth with a Gaedel (as well as a real Gaedel), which to many of us proved that this forger not only does a terrible Gaedel, he didn't seem, with that comparison, to have the skill to do a Ruth THAT well.
All I ever ask for when someone gives an opinion is to have them back it up with his/her reasons, and agree or disagree at least he finally did that.

[shelly]

Mike, I agree. To me it was the ticket first then the signiture. That is why I wanted to find out if the ticket was correct. I again want to thank everyone that went far and above what usually happens on here. It was nice seeing people working together and not takeing pop shots at each other.
Now its up to each person to decide is the autograph real or not.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by mr2686

All I ever ask for when someone gives an opinion is to have them back it up with his/her reasons, and agree or disagree at least he finally did that.

No, Mike, he didn't.

He presented a story outlining why he isn't happy with the provenance. He presented no information at all as to why he thinks the signature is the work of the so-called Michigan forger.

[mr2686]

Although he didn't elaborate, he did show additional work of "the forger" for us to draw our own conclusions...which I think we did. I do know what you're saying David, but I've given up at getting any additional type of info in situations like this, but hey I'm just a dumb 98 percenter.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by mr2686

Yes I did David. I was just taking the point a litte further. I still stand by my first post in this thread that the OP had good info. I base that strictly on his previous posts that did not tell us anything that would help us determine why he felt the sig was bad. With this tread, we learned that he did not believe the story and why, and whether we agree with all of it or not, it did start a very interesting ticket investigation on this very thread. The other part was to compare the Ruth with a Gaedel (as well as a real Gaedel), which to many of us proved that this forger not only does a terrible Gaedel, he didn't seem, with that comparison, to have the skill to do a Ruth THAT well.
All I ever ask for when someone gives an opinion is to have them back it up with his/her reasons, and agree or disagree at least he finally did that.

What info did he have? He thought it was rejected by PSA. It wasn't...he had no clue it was certified by JSA. It was. He believed it was rejected by Heritage. It wasn't... He disappears for over a week when questioned about all of this. He comes back and gives us a Red Riding Hood fairy tale that totally deflects from the autograph and focuses on the ticket.

These threads completely illustrate what is wrong in the autograph hobby and what is right in the memorabilia hobby. What did we learn about Babe Ruth autographs? Nothing. What did we learn about ticket stubs? A whole heck of a lot. We also learned something about the game played that day. Lots of collectors chimed in with their FACTS about the game and ticket stub. What did we learn from the 2 percenters? Nothing.

[JT]

+1

[Leon]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

What info did he have? He thought it was rejected by PSA. It wasn't...he had no clue it was certified by JSA. It was. He believed it was rejected by Heritage. It wasn't... He disappears for over a week when questioned about all of this. He comes back and gives us a Red Riding Hood fairy tale that totally deflects from the autograph and focuses on the ticket.

These threads completely illustrate what is wrong in the autograph hobby and what is right in the memorabilia hobby. What did we learn about Babe Ruth autographs? Nothing. What did we learn about ticket stubs? A whole heck of a lot. We also learned something about the game played that day. Lots of collectors chimed in with their FACTS about the game and ticket stub. What did we learn from the 2 percenters? Nothing.

In one of the threads it was pointed out, by SS, that the Ruth signature had some potential issues with it. In comparing some of them how many legitimate Ruth autographs have the A in Babe be open?

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Leon

In one of the threads it was pointed out, by SS, that the Ruth signature had some potential issues with it. In comparing some of them how many legitimate Ruth autographs have the A in Babe be open?

What did we learn? Are there no legit Ruth autographs with an open "A"?

[shelly]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

What did we learn? Are there no legit Ruth autographs with an open "A"?

No one said that. There no such thing as always.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

What did we learn? Are there no legit Ruth autographs with an open "A"?

Not many....?

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

What info did he have? He thought it was rejected by PSA. It wasn't...he had no clue it was certified by JSA. It was. He believed it was rejected by Heritage. It wasn't... He disappears for over a week when questioned about all of this. He comes back and gives us a Red Riding Hood fairy tale that totally deflects from the autograph and focuses on the ticket.

These threads completely illustrate what is wrong in the autograph hobby and what is right in the memorabilia hobby. What did we learn about Babe Ruth autographs? Nothing. What did we learn about ticket stubs? A whole heck of a lot. We also learned something about the game played that day. Lots of collectors chimed in with their FACTS about the game and ticket stub. What did we learn from the 2 percenters? Nothing.

+!

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by mr2686

I guess another question would be, even if he obtained it, it would have cost him an amount unusual for a forger to fork out considering he would only have one shot at creating such a convincing Ruth, so why not dummy up a fake ticket instead?

As Shelly said, now that we're through analyzing the ticket (for now, anyway), we can look at the signature.

I haven't heard anyone say that this signature is "convincing".

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by Runscott

As Shelly said, now that we're through analyzing the ticket (for now, anyway), we can look at the signature.

I haven't heard anyone say that this signature is "convincing".

I believe that some board members have said they believe that it's real.
I'm pretty certain David A. said it was in the 1st thread, FWIW.
If I'm wrong, please don't crucify me.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Scott Garner

I believe that some board members have said they believe that it's real.
I'm pretty certain David A. said it was in the 1st thread, FWIW.
If I'm wrong, please don't crucify me.

That's right. In this case, I agree with Jimmy Spence. (I have made a mistake or two in my 50+ years of collecting, and I have made a judgement or two on this very board without looking as closely as I should have, so ya'll gotta factor that in.)

But I believe the signature is good.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Scott Garner

I believe that some board members have said they believe that it's real.
I'm pretty certain David A. said it was in the 1st thread, FWIW.
If I'm wrong, please don't crucify me.

Haha. In any statistical analysis, you would throw out the highs and lows. I threw out a low.

[David Atkatz]

Ha ha. You must be high.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Ha ha. You must be high.

Well-played, sir

[David Atkatz]

Thank you.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Mr. Jim Stinson once commented:

Actually autograph authentication is pretty easy ....No magic wand, and simple formula is when in doubt... BOW OUT ! That includes 1% of doubt.


I have no doubt.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Mr. Jim Stinson once commented:

Actually autograph authentication is pretty easy ....No magic wand, and simple formula is when in doubt... BOW OUT ! That includes 1% of doubt.


I have no doubt.

FWIW, I believe Jim was talking about making a decision whether to purchase an autograph or not.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

I have no doubt.

No evidence, either.