Raw Babe Ruth Baseball Autograph - Opinions Requested Please

[daves_resale_shop]

Hey Alex,

I echo the above members and appreciate your service to our country...

The signature looks ok to me, but the thing that spooks my most are the stampings on the ball... The ball has a wonderful even white hue about it... the signature is bold, yet the stampings (that I assumed would have been produced in the 1930's have faded pretty significantly)

When I look at baseball's like this my thoughts are as follows:

1-Newly introduced hobby gem that has been tucked away in a sock in someones hope chest under perfect conditions

2-wonderfully produced replica ball using a period stamp pad with ink & the the application of a highly skilled Ruth forgery...

If Anything I would recommend you solicit the opinions of Richard Simon and or Jim Stinson... They are the best of the best when it comes to the baseball autograph collecting hobby...

Best,
Dave

[meatloaf]

Originally Posted by daves_resale_shop

Hey Alex,

I echo the above members and appreciate your service to our country...

The signature looks ok to me, but the thing that spooks my most are the stampings on the ball... The ball has a wonderful even white hue about it... the signature is bold, yet the stampings (that I assumed would have been produced in the 1930's have faded pretty significantly)

When I look at baseball's like this my thoughts are as follows:

1-Newly introduced hobby gem that has been tucked away in a sock in someones hope chest under perfect conditions

2-wonderfully produced replica ball using a period stamp pad with ink & the the application of a highly skilled Ruth forgery...

If Anything I would recommend you solocit the opinions of Richard Simon and or Jim Stinson... They are the best of the best when it comes to the baseball autograph collecting hobby...

Best,
Dave

I share your concerns. Thank you for the names. Working it now to contact them. Thank you again.

[bender07]

STINSON!

[Darner]

I think the stampings on the ball dates it to 1946-48 so if authentic it's from Ruth's last years. There seems to be a third star underneath the William Harridge signature which makes it post 1944 and there seems to be single line of type (the patent info) between "the cushioned cork center" and the circular Reach logo. I think in 1945 there was still a second line (marca registrata) underneath the patent line.

[MooseDog]

Originally Posted by bender07

STINSON!

Everyone needs to keep in mind that both Jim and Richard chime in with their opinions by virtue of their fairly generous natures. They also do provide opinions/authentication at a (reasonable) fee. Not having the item in hand, they may not be able to render an opinion on everything, but if I was contemplating a purchase under these circumstances I would certainly be willing to pay for a learned opinion.

On this particular item I'm particularly worried about the fact that the auction house and/or the consignor seem to be too cheap to pay for a service that might allow the item to sell for perhaps thousands more than it might without. With PSA/DNA high graded Ruth balls selling for five figures or more, it would be foolish not to play that lottery with this ball.

[Deertick]

I agree with David. Something doesn't sit well at first glance. In addition to the "faded" stampings and the otherwise super-clean look, to my eye it seems suspiciously toned in the area of the signature in relation to the rest of the panels. FWIW

I also agree that even if I had a picture of my father and the Pope with Ruth signing it, I would send it to JSA prior sale. To not do so on a ball of that caliber is silly and raises suspicion on my part.