Posted By:
Paul MuchinskyI am not really at all qualified to render an opinion on anything in the sports memorabilia hobby other than pinbacks, so I will defer to the card experts on your specific question. But here are two issues I have thought about regarding what we call "authentic" and what other sectors of society call "truth". Neither issue has anything to do with sports memorabilia.
1. Historically, where has the "big money" always been in collectibles? Art. When a Rembrandt or Monet sells for over $75M, somebody is putting their faith (as well as their money) in the word of some art authenticator that the painting in question is a} the picture was indeed painted by the attributed artist, and b) it is not a copy of the original by the attributed artist. How many times have we all read that painting X has been declared to be a forgery? Obviously someone's original judgment of authenticity was reversed by subsequent expert judgment. It wasn't all that long ago a leading auction house offered an Academy Award (the "Oscar") that turned out a very clever fraud, created by fusing the top half (the statue) with the base. The ultimate judgment was determined by the incorrect height of the award. If experts in the hyper-competitive world of the arts can be fooled, how about people who collect items of interest to us that the counterfeiters know will never be examined with the level of scutiny found in the arts?
2. Up until very recently, judgments of guilt in a criminal trial were decided by human opinion---the verdict of a jury. With the discovery of the diagnostic properties of a DNA analysis, how many people are now being released from prison, sometimes after serving many decades, where DNA corroborates their innocense, and de facto, proves the human judgment of the jury was in error? The courts were initially reluctant to use DNA as a standard, but now the method is so established it has become the basis to re-open cases decided long ago.
For me, the question will be whether our hobby will ever have the equivalent of our own "DNA test" for the items of interest to us. Since I know nothing about cards, I can offer no opinion about the possibility of a "DNA test" for paper and/or ink. I also know nothing about autographs. But from my reading of the members in this forum, it appears an autograph is never so much "validated" as being legitimate, as much as the experts can find no tell-tale signs it is not authentic. Thus all autograph experts can do (as it seems in my opinion) is to arrive at the conclusion, "either it is authentic or one really good counterfeit". Human judgment is fallible. As the art world has revealed, even people who are "world renowned experts" can and do sometimes make mistakes. We are all human, with some of us being "more human" than others.
Until our hobby discovers/develops/invents its own irrefutable "DNA test", errors of judgment will always be possible. It is just a question of how much skill, time, effort, and money the counterfeiters wish to invest in items to deceive us. In the art world, the answer is "massive".