Is this Ruth real? JSA says yes

khkco4bls · #1 07-12-2015, 02:20 PM

The lively model ball had the cheaper canvas type cover didn't it. Maybe that's why

Klrdds · #2 07-12-2015, 02:41 PM

I can read the Babe ok but the Ruth part of the signature looks strange to me even at a higher screen resolution . It may be real but I would pass on it for sure, regardless of the TPA letter. There are better ones available at possibly equal cost if you are patient .

w7imel · #3 07-12-2015, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klrdds

I can read the Babe ok but the Ruth part of the signature looks strange to me even at a higher screen resolution . It may be real but I would pass on it for sure, regardless of the TPA letter. There are better ones available at possibly equal cost if you are patient .

And now we are trusting 15 year old kids to authenticate Ruth autographs? Wow the hobby is in danger!!! Still looks like a stamped autograph and would not buy. Maybe Babe Was the one who stamped it.

Duluth Eskimo · #4 07-12-2015, 10:56 PM

While all you on the bandwagon jump high, I can tell you that I do not know a more honest and extremely knowledgeable sports memorabilia seller than Bryan Dec. He has been a full time seller for many years and I would trust him a hell of a lot more than most people on this board. I have done business with Bryan for years and he has been nothing but extremely honest. Bryan does not need JSA to tell him an autograph is real. If a mistake has been made, he would be the first to admit it and refund a persons money. Say what you want, but before you try to smear an honest person, you should know what the hell you are talking about. Jason

travrosty · #5 07-12-2015, 11:02 PM

nobody is smearing him, he brought it to jsa, and jsa called it real. if people dont like the sig, they can ask jsa why they thought it was good. otherwise why get a jsa cert?

Duluth Eskimo · #6 07-13-2015, 12:07 AM

There is the distinct possibility that it is real. I know that may be hard to comprehend because of the immense amount of "experts" on the board.

bnorth · #7 07-13-2015, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duluth Eskimo

While all you on the bandwagon jump high, I can tell you that I do not know a more honest and extremely knowledgeable sports memorabilia seller than Bryan Dec. He has been a full time seller for many years and I would trust him a hell of a lot more than most people on this board. I have done business with Bryan for years and he has been nothing but extremely honest. Bryan does not need JSA to tell him an autograph is real. If a mistake has been made, he would be the first to admit it and refund a persons money. Say what you want, but before you try to smear an honest person, you should know what the hell you are talking about. Jason

I didn't see anybody bashing Bryan in this thread. From the picture provided the Babe Ruth auto ink looks exactly like the stamping on the rest of the ball to me. I have no opinion on the ball because I do not know anything about this part of collecting. I do like to read this section of the forum though.

bdecsports · #8 07-20-2015, 01:40 PM

As mentioned before, the auction-service JSA LOA was recently upgraded on this Ruth ball, and an image of the full-service JSA LOA has been added to the eBay listing, seller JKAYMAC.

Regards,
Bryan Dec

bdecsports.com

packs · #9 07-20-2015, 02:12 PM

I am not a professional and have no opinion on anyone's reputation. This is solely an observation on the baseball:

If you look at the printed text on the sweetspot, the text has the same dot pattern in it that you then see in the signature. Regardless of authentication, I can't help but see the similarities between what is most definitely printed on the baseball vs what is said to be written onto it.

w7imel · #10 08-23-2015, 10:33 PM

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BABE-RUTH-SI...item5d5c7eaf04

khkco4bls · #11 08-24-2015, 06:40 AM

And I still think its stamped

packs · #12 08-24-2015, 08:25 AM

I still don't see how you can differentiate between the printed stamping and the supposed written on signature. The stamping, along with the dot patterns in both the known stamp and supposed signature, look exactly the same to me. So if one is stamped the other is stamped.

Duluth Eskimo · #13 08-24-2015, 09:25 AM

Well, you could have looked at it in person and the National instead of "seeing" or "thinking". OR, you could have talked to Bryan yourself. I looked at the ball myself at the national and it is clearly different, but I guess you can have your own opinion.

packs · #14 08-24-2015, 09:50 AM

Well I admit I didn't travel to Chicago to look at this one particular baseball. What I have available to me is the auction photo and my eyes. To you, the stamping isn't similar? You don't see the same dot pattern in the signature and stamp?

Duluth Eskimo · #15 08-24-2015, 12:49 PM

I didn't say it doesn't appear similar, it does at first glance. I know the seller and he is a very honest person and I would give him the benefit of the doubt and did. I also looked with my own eyes and it is different. I don't think there's an issue.

David Atkatz · #16 08-24-2015, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

You don't see the same dot pattern in the signature and stamp?

I am not offering an opinion on the authenticity of the signature. But the "dot pattern" is simply the grain of the leather. When the surface ink wears away, it still remains in the depressions. Thus, the dot pattern will be identical, and does not depend at all upon the way the ink was applied to the ball. Notice the dots in the Ruth signature below.

Runscott · #17 08-24-2015, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duluth Eskimo

...but I guess you can have your own opinion.

I applaud the refreshing change in Jason's way of thinking.

packs · #18 08-24-2015, 02:38 PM

Did anyone else see the ball at the National? I am not saying anything about the seller's reputation or honesty, I'm curious about opinions on what looks to be stamped and what doesn't. I have been unable so far to find another example of the "Youth's Lively" baseball. I found a catalog as early as 1929 advertising them for sale, but there is only an artist rendering and not a complete view of the baseball.

Duluth Eskimo · #19 08-25-2015, 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Runscott

I applaud the refreshing change in Jason's way of thinking.

It's really a shame we didn't get to meet in person at the national.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ruth Sig - Real or Not so much?	Shoeless Moe	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	4	01-30-2011 09:54 AM
Are 1917 Collins-McCarthy Babe Ruth and 1921 Oxford Ruth real?	Peleseller	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	6	01-07-2011 03:07 PM
Real Ruth or not?	yanks12025	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	4	11-04-2009 02:06 PM
Real Ruth?	GrayGhost	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	5	10-30-2009 07:48 PM
This '33 Ruth #53 isn't real, is it?	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	09-22-2001 01:51 PM