Greenberg - deceased signature?

[theshleps]

I got this slabbed a few years back when Bill Corcoran came to visit my collection. Don't remember how I originally got the card. Problem is it is a 1987 All Time Greats and Greenberg died in 1986. Does anyone know if the cards came out alittle early which would explain it? otherwise there is a good Greenberg forger out there which I would find quite disturbing being he is a main focus of my collecting
Greenberg 1987 All time greats.jpg

[rand1com]

I don't really like the autograph but Bill has much more knowledge than me.

The space between the "n" and "k" looks a bit unusual for his signature and some of the other letters look a little off but could have been because of the thicker marker he was using.

I have no idea about the actual dating of the set but it would not surprise me if it was out before the 1987 official date but since he died on September 4, 1986 I doubt it was out early enough for him to have signed it.

Bill is a professional and I would take his opinion over most but in this case he may be incorrect based on the dating. I would have him take another look at it and see if his opinion has changed.

He is certainly not infallible and I'm sure he would admit that because he has integrity.

See what others here have to say about this signature.

[mrmopar]

A possibility? Does the set actually have 1987 printed on them? i know they are cataloged as a 1987 set, but...Maybe they were sold earlier in lesser quantity before 1987, I see some 50 card blister type packs online. However, could they have been made a bit earlier and sold a different way before going the retail blister pack route? Those all-time great sets by off brand manufacturers could have been made before the generally accepted date. Just a shot in the dark that could help explain why a dead guy might have been able to sign one!

[egri]

Originally Posted by mrmopar

A possibility? Does the set actually have 1987 printed on them? i know they are cataloged as a 1987 set, but...Maybe they were sold earlier in lesser quantity before 1987, I see some 50 card blister type packs online. However, could they have been made a bit earlier and sold a different way before going the retail blister pack route? Those all-time great sets by off brand manufacturers could have been made before the generally accepted date. Just a shot in the dark that could help explain why a dead guy might have been able to sign one!

Could also be a fat finger by PSA. I have a 1953 Topps that sits in a 1954 holder because of a bad typist.

[theshleps]

Originally Posted by egri

Could also be a fat finger by PSA. I have a 1953 Topps that sits in a 1954 holder because of a bad typist.

Curt I hope you are right. Everywhere they are as listed as 1987 Hygrade and PSA was right in labeling it such. The back of the card has no date so maybe it did come out early.
Does anyone thing the sig looks bad?

[rand1com]

According to the PSA/DNA population report, yours is the only Greenberg card authenticated from this set.

Not sure that means anything since at best even if the set was issued in mid 1986 which I doubt, the chance for him to sign through the mail was very slim.

I personally doubt it is authentic for reasons already expressed in an earlier post.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by egri

Could also be a fat finger by PSA. I have a 1953 Topps that sits in a 1954 holder because of a bad typist.

It's free to get that fixed. Either use the web portal or email them with the title "Mechanical Error" and they'll send you a mailing label to get it to them, fix it for free, and mail it back on their own dime. Plus, it will now be in a red flip since they got rid of blue flips.

[egri]

Originally Posted by swarmee

It's free to get that fixed. Either use the web portal or email them with the title "Mechanical Error" and they'll send you a mailing label to get it to them, fix it for free, and mail it back on their own dime. Plus, it will now be in a red flip since they got rid of blue flips.

Thanks John. I actually bought it like that; I was amused enough by the error that I picked it up, and I don't use PSA's registry, so I don't really have a reason to get it fixed.