REA Gary Cooper

[Runscott]

Well-done

It's a shame given how many characteristics of a genuine Ruth-signed piece it possesses, especially the straight-edge-like writing, which was a trademark of Ruth's more 'carefully-signed' pieces :roll eyes:

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Well-done

It's a shame given how many characteristics of a genuine Ruth-signed piece it possesses, especially the straight-edge-like writing, which was a trademark of Ruth's more 'carefully-signed' pieces :roll eyes:

Why are you rolling your eyes? The piece is not bad because it was written straight.. It is bad because it was bad. There were plenty of good examples given of geniune Ruth's written straight Scott. That is nice work on this one I must say.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

Why are you rolling your eyes? The piece is not bad because it was written straight.. It is bad because it was bad. There were plenty of good examples given of geniune Ruth's written straight Scott. That is nice work on this one I must say.

Ben, all bad items are bad because they are bad. But the characteristics of bad items are what allow us to figure out that they are bad - this bad item looked bad before we had the non-provenance. It has other bad characteristics other than it's 'too neat' aspect, but if I began listing them, I'd have do debate those points with people I have no desire to discuss anything with (I'm not talking about you). I hate to sound like an elitist, but when I know something is a fact, arguing with people who argue simply because they like to fight, isn't the least bit appealing (again, I'm not talking about you).

If you want to discuss, just give me a call.

[BigJJ]

I do not know which is more inaccurate:
the authenticity of the autograph
or the manner in which this was reported to all of us.
"probe nabs" - it makes it sound criminal.
The spirit, and accuracy, of this reporting is far worse than the subject it tackles.
I was really put off by this write-up.
and if this autograph would have fooled many, or all of us - and fooled PSA - and fooled JSA, then why in the world, would you write "probe nabs" with regard to the auctioneer.
The positives of someone bringing inaccuracies to light - must be weighed against the negatives in the manner in which they do it.
On the whole, this report creates more inaccuracies than it resolves.

[JimStinson]

Autograph authentication for DUMMIES ! Look at the autograph LAST do your research FIRST
_____________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[Leon]

Originally Posted by JimStinson

Autograph authentication for DUMMIES ! Look at the autograph LAST do your research FIRST
_____________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

That reminds me of the Ruth autograph, from a board member touting his authenticator's superior ability, on a 1953 Silver Certificate.

And I am not commenting on the Cooper item, I know nothing about it.

.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by Leon

That reminds me of the Ruth autograph, from a board member touting his authenticator's superior ability, on a 1953 Silver Certificate.

And I am not commenting on the Cooper item, I know nothing about it.

.

That was ridiculous. The same seller had a bunch of babe Ruth "type 1" photos that were not even close to type 1s that were bgs slabbed that he was selling. A couple still pop up on ebay(they are usually buy it nows or best offers and have a brown tint/heavy paper stock). and are worth about as much as kindling. There was one 8x10 bain image that was thick stock.. so fake. PRIME example of get what you can get authenticated and sell rather than being concerned if it is good or not.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Ben, all bad items are bad because they are bad. But the characteristics of bad items are what allow us to figure out that they are bad - this bad item looked bad before we had the non-provenance. It has other bad characteristics other than it's 'too neat' aspect, but if I began listing them, I'd have do debate those points with people I have no desire to discuss anything with (I'm not talking about you). I hate to sound like an elitist, but when I know something is a fact, arguing with people who argue simply because they like to fight, isn't the least bit appealing (again, I'm not talking about you).

If you want to discuss, just give me a call.

I understand what you are saying but I think the straight line comment(rolling eyes) was a a little personal nudge you have to admit? I like the objective Scott.. Poking a bear can ruin one's day. "Only you can prevent Forrest Fires" So says Smokey.

Dude... I just made that up... it was not intended to be a dig at all...had to post it. haha I was going to call you anyway to discuss a couple photos.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

I understand what you are saying but I think the straight line comment(rolling eyes) was a a little personal nudge you have to admit? I like the objective Scott.. Poking a bear can ruin one's day. "Only you can prevent Forrest Fires" So says Smokey.

Dude... I just made that up... it was not intended to be a dig at all...had to post it. haha I was going to call you anyway to discuss a couple photos.

A personal nudge at who? I'm honestly confused - I mentioned the straight line thing the first time this piece was brought up, and other than a rebuke by David that did not involve his presenting anything similar that WAS real, I got no response from anyone.

What you probably don't know is that I've discussed this piece with others, over the phone, so I'm rolling my eyes based on several characteristics of the piece that we've discussed, plus at the fact that it's even up for auction.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by Runscott

A personal nudge at who? I'm honestly confused - I mentioned the straight line thing the first time this piece was brought up, and other than a rebuke by David that did not involve his presenting anything similar that WAS real, I got no response from anyone.

What you probably don't know is that I've discussed this piece with others, over the phone, so I'm rolling my eyes based on several characteristics of the piece that we've discussed, plus at the fact that it's even up for auction.

No worries.. I figured you have been talking to others on the board with your strong aligned beliefs.

I believe you pointed out the straight edge line originally... and there were examples shown of authentic examples of straigh edge looking sigs. Idk.. I could be wrong.. my memory is not as good as it once was. And.. it really doesn't matter at this point anyway. The stupid Forger should have totally mixed it up a bit and made the signature uneven.. then it would have passed everyone's "sniff test". Stupid forger.... haha

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

The stupid Forger should have totally mixed it up a bit and made the signature uneven.. then it would have passed everyone's "sniff test". Stupid forger.... haha

Ben, where in the world did that statement come from? No one said that the straight lines were the only thing wrong with this item; in fact, I specifically stated that they were NOT.

Also, if anyone presented an example that had several straight lines and this many words, they deleted it - I doubt any such exemplar exists.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

No worries.. I figured you have been talking to others on the board with your strong aligned beliefs.

Ben, you've confused the hell out of me three times in one thread. Where did this statement come from?

All I can make of this is that you think the writing on this photo was by Ruth, and that there is some sort of conspiracy to discredit the authenticator. Quite frankly, without going back and looking, I couldn't tell you if it was JSA, PSA or both who authenticated it. So whatever group you have me 'strongly aligned' with in your head - please remove me.

[JimStinson]

Originally Posted by Runscott

A personal nudge at who? I'm honestly confused - I mentioned the straight line thing the first time this piece was brought up, and other than a rebuke by David that did not involve his presenting anything similar that WAS real, I got no response from anyone.

What you probably don't know is that I've discussed this piece with others, over the phone, so I'm rolling my eyes based on several characteristics of the piece that we've discussed, plus at the fact that it's even up for auction.

Please forgive me BUT forget the straight lines signature formation, slant , comparisons to known examplars etc argument..... These guys are SO good they will BLOW YOUR SIGNATURE COMPARISIONS OUT OF THE WATER ! Its gone beyond comparing to known examples simiply because the guys that USED to make money doing fake passports, currency etc have moved into the realm of autographs ......listen to me please , there is tremendous finincial reward in comparison and virtually NO legal consequenses .... So it is the "PERFECT STORM" for these guys ......So STOP comparing signature anaylisis because these guys draw $20.00 bills FREEHAND so easy to replicate a Babe Ruth or Lou Gehrig ???? Don't underestimate their skill level as it is far beyond what you percieve ...or could even attempt to guess
_______________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by JimStinson

Please forgive me BUT forget the straight lines signature formation, slant , comparisons to known examplars etc argument..... These guys are SO good they will BLOW YOUR SIGNATURE COMPARISIONS OUT OF THE WATER ! Its gone beyond comparing to known examples simiply because the guys that USED to make money doing fake passports, currency etc have moved into the realm of autographs ......listen to me please , there is tremendous finincial reward in comparison and virtually NO legal consequenses .... So it is the "PERFECT STORM" for these guys ......So STOP comparing signature anaylisis because these guys draw $20.00 bills FREEHAND so easy to replicate a Babe Ruth or Lou Gehrig ???? Don't underestimate their skill level as it is far beyond what you percieve ...or could even attempt to guess
_______________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

Agreed.... I think I will stay dumb and collect photos with the occasional legal document, ck, letter and/or gpc

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Runscott

A personal nudge at who? I'm honestly confused - I mentioned the straight line thing the first time this piece was brought up, and other than a rebuke by David that did not involve his presenting anything similar that WAS real, I got no response from anyone.

So you're saying that both items I showed--one of the signed and numbered special edition 1929 Ruth's Own Book of Baseball, and the "To Mary Keegan" photo were both forged?

[JimStinson]

I am OTTA here ...forgive me BUT color me GONE.....Bye , Hasta Manana or whatever the F anyone says I'm...............................LONG GONE ...ADIOS AMIGOS
____________________
jim@stinsonsports.com