1927 Yankees team ball forgery

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

David - I share the feelings of all those who have posted, saddened by your loss and uplifted by your honesty. As a scientist, do you feel that the "proof" of a forgery is just as difficult as the "proof" of authenticity? If so, where does that leave us?

Thanks, Craig.
There are many ways to "prove" a forgery--impossible-for-the-time materials, the signor not being physically able to have signed at the date and place indicated by the piece (letter, postcard, etc.), lousy execution...
I think it's impossible, though, to prove authenticity. If you didn't see the item being signed--and with the vintage pieces many of us collect that, of course is not possible--the best you can do is not find any evidence of fraud. A strong provenance goes a long way, too. At the end of the day, though, all you can say is "I believe, with some high level of confidence" that the piece is genuine. How high that level must be--and what it takes to produce that level--varies with the individual collector.

[yanks12025]

David,
What will you do with the ball now?

[Rickyy]

I'm also very sorry to read this...kudos to David and all of the others who are willing to share their knowledge, expertise and expose those who continue to deceive people in this hobby that we all share in and love.

Ricky Y

[murphusa]

If I go to purchased a house and it needed a soil test for the spectic tank etc and a company gave me a certificate that said "in their opinion based on such and such" that the soil was ok and then I buy the house but find out 10 years latter that their results were not up to standards and that was the reason for illness etc.

Wouldn't I be able to go to court, Why not here

I based my decession on a report that everything was OK, now I find out they are not

[steve B]

Sorry to hear about the ball David, That's got to make for a rough day.

I'm hoping you save it as an object to study, comparisons might help someone else later on. Tough call though as it's a dangerous forgery.

Steve B

[Bilko G]

You are a really stand up guy David for not putting this ball back into an auction and i am really sorry this happened to you.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by murphusa

If I go to purchased a house and it needed a soil test for the spectic tank etc and a company gave me a certificate that said "in their opinion based on such and such" that the soil was ok and then I buy the house but find out 10 years latter that their results were not up to standards and that was the reason for illness etc.

Wouldn't I be able to go to court, Why not here

I based my decession on a report that everything was OK, now I find out they are not

Because the soil test will be detailed. Not an opinion.

Here's what we tested for, and what we found at what level and how that compares to what the law allows.

If the testing was done wrong, yes you can pursue it.
If the allowable levels changed and are a problem now when they weren't 10 years ago....Maybe, but I doubt it would work.

If they say "we dug a hole and the dirt looks ok" that's just an opinion and is closer to a COA that the actual soil test.
The technology is available now to know a load of stuff about a signed item, but it's not quite cheap enough yet.


Steve B

[Caseyatbat]

David, you mentioned earlier in the thread this was a Spence ball. Was this ball fully authenticated with a full letter from JSA or PSA when Spence was with them? Or did it just come with an auction letter of authenticity or possibly only a verbal opinion?

[David Atkatz]

It was a James Spence letter from 1999, when he was on his own before PSA.

[Caseyatbat]

have you submitted it to be re-authenticated by PSA or JSA since you have owned it? Or possibly asked James Spence if he would stand behind his previous opinion and give this ball a new letter?

I am not saying I believe it would pass. There are several red flags that have already been pointed out in this thread. I just have never seen anybody give up on such a valuable item so quickly that was already authenticated by a top TPA just because of the opinion of 1 or 2 people.