Mantle signature opinions

[khkco4bls]

that looks real to me to. the N in mantle very hard to forge that different slant

[Fuddjcal]

I agree with Truth that the first ball is a terrible forgery and the 2nd one is authentic. My reasoning on the "authentic" ball is that the way the "M" in Mantle attaches or interacts with the "a". The M in Mantle tends to "flick upward" not with pressure, but with a natural motion of going from M to Ma.Notice in the fake, it is very labored in that area and most time it is a clear stopping starting motion, not even in the right place. The fact that the M's don't look right at all on the first ball and the c is pointing up. (Mickey's rarely pointed up, but in the forgeries, they look like they say "Milkey". Occasionally, he would not curve the c fully, but it still looks nothing like these forgeries.

The n in the forgeries are also terrible and the appear to say Mauntle.

Now in the real thing ball #2, Notice the way the M goes with the Ma. It was also rare for him to strike through the half moons. He normally came right to the exact spot and then transfered a drop of ink there. Still from what you can see # 2 looks Real #1 is not close.

Now for the GAI PICTURE.......

[Fuddjcal]

So here's what a real signature looks like on that same picture. This one doesn't have a cert, but it is very easy to see this one is authentic.

Notice how it is right on the sweet spot of the photo. Notice the formation of the M's and the flow, size and where it is on the photo. Notice the way there is a little flick where the M goes into the a naturally. The c is rounded and not pointing up. Also notice how the half moons end with a little dab of ink. There are other things too that I just can't muster going into. Do it for yourself and you can be an expert in 2 weeks.

There are some authentic ones to that "don't flick" from the "M" to "a", but this is one area I always focus on. It's much easier for me to see the authentic vs. forgery, Not 100%, but 97% isn't bad?

[jb217676]

Here's a great sig. that I got in person.

[scmavl]

What about the occasional "loop" at the end of the half moons? Were these more prominant later?

Example (not mine):

[Mr. Zipper]

Hi folks:

Newbie here... by way of introduction my name is Steve and I've been collecting about 20 years. Mantle has always been somewhat of a struggle for me because it's so hard to assemble a large body of KNOWN authentics to "train the eye." This discussion has been very enlightening.

I just learned that one of my Mantles is not good and now am concerned about a second.

Here's one Richard Simon gave the thumbs down. It passes the litmus tests discussed here, but there must be something else...



Here's the one I am now concerned about. I purchased this in 2000 from a show dealer and it came with a COA stating it came from Gloria Rothstein (NY show promoter). It is on photostock that appears to be from the 80s. Previously, I would have bet almost anything it was good, but it doesn't have the "flicks" discussed here. The "c" and the "n" seem to be okay though.



It compares favotably to this PSA autehticated piece of the same pose.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Mickey-Mantle-si...item336343f165

Thoughts?

Thanks!

[Fuddjcal]

boy, those are tough

I guess it must have more to do with things I don't know how to qualify. The first one certainly looks better than the second. I would trust Richards opinion probably over just about anybody, so he knows something about these versions, which appear much better than the ones we were discussing?

I think it has to do with the "n" (no point) on either one of them. On the second one, the "antle" is too low in my opinion and I really don't like the "Man".

If those are forgeries, that really shows you what we are up against. These are a different breed than the blatent fakes which are really easy to see. I think I would be a sucker for the first one. The 2nd I would not bid on, even though in my mind, it "might" be authentic, based on what I feel are really good "Mickey's", but the Mantle is fairly messy, so I would pass.

I will be on the look out for more of these sytles to see if PSA or JSA has certed any of these??? Thanks for posting those. FUDD

[chaddurbin]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

There are some authentic ones to that "don't flick" from the "M" to "a", but this is one area I always focus on. It's much easier for me to see the authentic vs. forgery, Not 100%, but 97% isn't bad?

cool analysis chuck...you got me looking at my own mantle. i see the "flick" on the Ma and other signs of authentic...but my Mantle looks a little like Mauntle

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

cool analysis chuck...you got me looking at my own mantle. i see the "flick" on the Ma and other signs of authentic...but my Mantle looks a little like Mauntle

so it does, but not as pronounced. Still every other aspect including that pointy "n" look great to me. On both of those authentic samples, notice how he leaves some ink when he stops the pen on the completion of the half moons, which come up short of the top of the apex.

The "Loop" does throw a monkey wrench into some forgeries that are really good at doing that style, but of course his signature changed and there are many variations. The loops were beautiful and hard to find authentic. Here's one of my favorites with the loop from my collection. Ironically, it's the only Global certed item in my collection and rarer than a signed beatle album

[TexasLeaguer]

Here's one I got in the early 90s.

[thetruthisoutthere]

When it comes to any Mickey Mantle autograph you cannot just look at the "M" in his first and last name. One of the biggest problems the forgers have is getting the "N" right in Mantle. Most of the forgers have their "Mantle" looking like "Mautle." When you sign your own name you don't even think about it. It's a natural flow. Forgers have to "think" about what they are doing. They may work very hard at getting one part (or just one character) right but then the next character or following characters eludes them. And that's where they mess up.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

cool analysis chuck...you got me looking at my own mantle. i see the "flick" on the Ma and other signs of authentic...but my Mantle looks a little like Mauntle

This is a very good Mantle, Chuck. The forgers can't get this particular Mantle right. The forgers Mantle always looks like "Mautle."