Very, very, interesting...

D. Bergin · #1 12-16-2011, 01:09 PM

I personally know of a stash of about 2 dozen signed team balls on Official League balls, in my area originating from the 1936-38 period. Mostly baseball but a few football teams from the era also included in the collection.

No doubt of the authenticity and all still stored in their original boxes. They are in simply beautiful condition.

I believe they were passed down through the family of a reporter or other newspaper employee and have sat untouched for decades.

So yeah, I know from experience there are still pristine balls out there from that era. They weren't all batted around in kids backyards.

slidekellyslide · #2 12-16-2011, 01:13 PM

I bought a 12 count box of signed baseball from the 1930s of a former minor leaguer in the Brooklyn Dodgers farm system...he shellacked all of them except for 4 of them...the shellacked balls were all browned, the other 4 were still snowy white and on average they'd been handled by 20 different hands. They were all stored in the original baseball boxes inside a 12 count box.

perezfan · #3 12-16-2011, 03:18 PM

Of course there are plenty of pristine near-white balls from that era still in existence. Especially if they contain Babe Ruth's signature. Even if there was no established monetary value back in the 30s/40s, there was sentimental value and pride of ownership. Even back then, most people had the common sense to stash away a keepsake like this (as opposed to mis-handling it or playing with it).

With that said, there are undoubtedly tons of fakes as well. But to say that a large number of these balls couldn't remain near white/near mint is just a ridiculous assumption.

David Atkatz · #4 12-16-2011, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by perezfan

Of course there are plenty of pristine near-white balls from that era still in existence. Especially if they contain Babe Ruth's signature. Even if there was no established monetary value back in the 30s/40s, there was sentimental value and pride of ownership. Even back then, most people had the commmon sense to stash away a keepsake like this (as opposed to mis-handling it or playing with it).

With that said, there are undoubtedly tons of fakes as well. But to say that a large number of these balls couldnt remain near white/near mint is just a ridiculous assumption.

+1

David Atkatz · #5 12-21-2011, 02:07 AM

The series continues...
http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=10608#more-10608

Exhibitman · #6 12-21-2011, 07:27 AM

Honestly, I am not impressed by the latest article. Everyone has an opinion; unlike stolen artifacts, there's no smoking gun there. It isn't like the Ruth sigs in question are obvious fakes like the crap in Coach's Corner. Plus it is a little misleading to compare scans of flats with pictures of signatures written on a curved surface. Not only do the conditions affect the signer but there is some flattening of the image on the latter that results in a distortion that our eyes compensate for when we look at a curved object directly.

GrayGhost · #7 12-21-2011, 08:07 AM

I think the article is fascinating, and at the VERY LEAST should be serious food for thought. The Alphabet authenticators have garnered such a name, based on advertising dollars, and apparently a level of Skill (how much?), that their work is basically just "taken for granted" as real.

I know from an untrained eye that the signatures on the balls in the article have basically NO slant on the small b in Babe, save for one example. Many of them look nearly identical.

Point is, nobody has a signature thats identical all the time, tho there are many times they are close. What I mean is, suppose in the photo there w Babe w a bunch of balls on the dugout to sign. The group. signed right after another, would probably be fairly close to the same, while one signed later, days or hours, or w/e, may vary some.

IMO, the article does seem to be aiming to shoot down the Alphabet guys, but from what I see, even with the "flat exemplars" only, there is ENOUGH here to at least give a serious look at some or all of those balls being fake. That is, unless you are one of those who think that the Alphabet guys' s*** doesn't stink.

travrosty · #8 12-21-2011, 08:09 AM

It is pretty obvious.

The real signatures are at a considerable slant to the right compared to the balls. The ball signatures stand upright, like someone patiently waiting at a bus stop.

The real signatures flow to the right, they slant and look like they are running for the bus. Look at just the capital letters, the B and R. The capital B is like a rocking chair facing to the right. In the real examples, it's leaning forward on its rockers, weight bearing forward. On the balls, it is back upright, on its haunches.

The real ones are constantly pushing/leaning to the right, like they are falling over. The balls feature B and R's that stand up, they look lackadaisical, not signed fast enough.

The real ones sometimes exhibit a skip here and there, from the a to the b in Babe for instance. there is ink loss in some examples, he is signing fast.

The balls look methodically dark and uniform. Like someone was trying to put the perfect slow dark signature on it when in reality someone signs fast and if there is a skip or ink loss from one letter to another, they don't throw it away, the ball still gets handed out, but in all the questionable balls, I see a 'managed' autograph. Using a ballgame analogy, instead of playing to win, they are playing not to lose.

But that's my opinion.

I defer to Ron K. though. If he sees similar characteristics, I would go with that, with what he observes. He's the man. That's why part 4-10 should be interesting.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What's the most interesting collection you've heard of that is not yours?	almostdone	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	0	08-07-2011 07:49 PM
Share an interesting fact about a t206 player	David R	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	46	10-18-2010 09:26 PM
Interesting & Funny 19th Century Baseball Stories	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	04-02-2009 07:21 PM
Interesting story regarding the T-206 Wagner	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	7	11-29-2007 06:27 PM
I saw three very interesting items today (N310 Anson, E90-1 Clarke, E103 Lajoie)	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	24	11-18-2004 08:18 AM