Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Garner
What Chris is trying to point out is that the ticket itself is not conclusively a ticket from 7/13/34. The inference is that because "Babe's" sig has been applied, it must be from his 700th career HR even though there is no year present.
FWIW, as I have stated from the beginning, I am not 100% comfortable that this ticket is from 7/13/34. The ticket in of itself does not stand on its own. It all boils down to the credibility of the actual Babe Ruth sig. Here is where people don't appear to agree.
I too would love to see the proof that refutes the authenticity of the Ruth sig.
|
but it's not conclusively NOT a ticket from 1934 either, so likw you said, that doesnt make the signature good or bad.
I did ask chris once for his opinion on a joe dimaggio autographed baseball that an antique shop had for sale in my area once, and for the record, he said no good. i didnt buy it because i dont know dimaggio. chris knows dimaggio, and ruth and cy young, and all the rest.
my favorite story on a thread about cy young.
baseball expert comes on and says that cy young couldnt have possibly signed the ball, because the ball was manufactured after young had died.
soon after, mr. chris comes on and says 'look at that horrible piece of junk'. This thread is getting to be a parody of itself. Why start it if no evidence is shown and just to stir up a hornets you know what nest?