Why our autograph experts are often silent

[perezfan]

Just to play "devil's advocate"....

I think it's likely authentic. Looks almost identical to the Ruth signature on a 1926 Yankees Team Ball I once had and consigned to Leland's.

Also....

* Ted K. (pugskiddo) is a former major leaguer, and a trusted ebay seller for many many years. Definitely not one of ebay's sleezebag dealers, or a "fly by night" guy.

* I see nothing to dispel Kevin Keating's authentication of the ball. I believe it did pass Keating's authentication process.

Just my 2 cents...

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Just to play "devil's advocate"....

I think it's likely authentic. Looks almost identical to the Ruth signature on a 1926 Yankees Team Ball I once had and consigned to Leland's.

Then show it, or any that look like this. If it's real, it's real, but I have never seen a Ruth signature that looks like this and would need an example to convince me.

Originally Posted by perezfan

Also....

* Ted K. (pugskiddo) is a former major leaguer, and a trusted ebay seller for many many years. Definitely not one of ebay's sleezebag dealers, or a "fly by night" guy.

Also, it's great that he's not a sleezebag dealer, but being a former major leaguer doesn't add credibility to his autograph authentication abilities.

[perezfan]

The listing/image no longer resides on Leland's site. Guess it's too early a listing. The ball was part of a trade to Brock L. and then later I believe was sold to Paul (Shoeless Moe), both Forum members here. I could be mistaken on the latter. Perhaps one of them still has an image, and can post a picture of the 1926 Yankees Ball.

Also of note.... the shellac appears vintage and of the era, and the Ruth signature is underneath the shellac. So if it's a forgery, it is an extremely early one. I still say it's real, and authenticated by Keating.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by perezfan

The listing/image no longer resides on Leland's site. Guess it's too early a listing. The ball was part of a trade to Brock L. and then later I believe was sold to Paul (Shoeless Moe), both Forum members here. I could be mistaken on the latter. Perhaps one of them still has an image, and can post a picture of the 1926 Yankees Ball.

Also of note.... the shellac appears vintage and of the era, and the Ruth signature is underneath the shellac. So if it's a forgery, it is an extremely early one. I still say it's real, and authenticated by Keating.

If it's real, there should be others out there that look like it - I haven't seen any.

The shellac thing is unconvincing - I've seen plenty of Ruth forgeries beneath similar-looking shellac, with the predictable chips.

I don't believe it's real, but have no problem changing my mind if someone can convince me. Nothing so far.

[perezfan]

Also, it's great that he's not a sleezebag dealer, but being a former major leaguer doesn't add credibility to his autograph authentication abilities.[/QUOTE]

The fact that he's a former major leaguer is a side-note, and has no bearing on his authentic skills.... that's correct. I included that info in response to labeling him one of "these ebay creeps". He has been a reputable seller for many years (perhaps since ebay's inception), and I know many people on this forum have successfully bought/sold/traded with Ted over the years.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by perezfan

The fact that he's a former major leaguer is a side-note, and has no bearing on his authentic skills.... that's correct. I included that info in response to labeling him one of "these ebay creeps". He has been a reputable seller for many years (perhaps since ebay's inception), and I know many people on this forum have successfully bought/sold/traded with Ted over the years.

I heard you. Just to make sure you understand that I heard you: he's a reputable seller, has been around a long time, and has had many great deals with people you know. I get it - he's not a creep. That doesn't mean he can't sell a forgery.

[perezfan]

Ok Scott... a healthy debate, and I respect your opinion. Debate/disagreement is a good thing on this forum.

That said.... where the hell is everyone else

[Runscott]

haha. Well, if you can sound more convincing, I know of three people who will jump in and say "it is real", simply because I said it isn't.

Also, you have to remember that the items that convince most Net54 members that a Ruth is real...are missing: PSA and JSA letters. That leaves them having to do their own thinking.

[perezfan]

OK here you go. A very similar example, authenticated by PSA...

http://bidami.com/Auctions/AuctionIt...d=35142&t=&p=0

[perezfan]

The 1926 Team Ball mentioned earlier is pictured about 3/4 of the way down on this link...

http://www.network54.com/Forum/56713...our+Collection

Of course there are subtle differences, as is always the case. I now have a migraine, and this used up all the available time I had tonight. So I will leave it to Scott and others to debate/nitpick/shoot down Keating/rip the seller/say that I'm an idiot/etc.

[Runscott]

No offense Mark, but not even close - either of them. Your two examples definitely look similar to each other, but not to the ebay example in question.