A Jimmy Spence authentication question.

[GrayGhost]

I can't disagree w Trav's constant attacks on JSA, meaning that he is taking every chance to attack them. His novella here on the Negro league print makes a LOT of sense, as does his statement of taking LOA's at "face value". But, constantly pointing out weaknesses in JSA or anyone else just seems like whining at times.

I would overall still take JSA or PSA , or Richard Simon, Stinson, or someone like that over Drew Mucks, Preddy, or Moorales any time. Yes, it is because of "reputation and advertising" to a large degree. In the end, I still feel they get more right by a LARGE PCTG than the FDA's I named.

In the end tho, if not comftorable w the Alphabet guys, Richard, Stinson or FDA's opinions, then do NOT buy the item, WITHOUT researching the signature(s) if possible. This part of the Hobby has taken a HUGE hit lately, and its now time for the COLLECTOR and HONEST DEALER to start being more proactive and less reactive to someone else's opinions

Scott Roberts

[frankbmd]

Spence's letter lists Jetroe as a key.

I thought it was Jethroe. Is there an h is his exemplar?

Whose proofreading at JSA? I guess they don't have time.

I spent 2 minutes searching for Jetroe and came up with the following link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNl3_ncbdzU

The guy seems to be pleasing his audience, but I'm not sure why.

[murphusa]

as Kevin Keating has done alot of work with Negro League players, his letter would be my choice for this piece

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by GrayGhost

I can't disagree w Trav's constant attacks on JSA, meaning that he is taking every chance to attack them. His novella here on the Negro league print makes a LOT of sense, as does his statement of taking LOA's at "face value". But, constantly pointing out weaknesses in JSA or anyone else just seems like whining at times.

I would overall still take JSA or PSA , or Richard Simon, Stinson, or someone like that over Drew Mucks, Preddy, or Moorales any time. Yes, it is because of "reputation and advertising" to a large degree. In the end, I still feel they get more right by a LARGE PCTG than the FDA's I named.

In the end tho, if not comftorable w the Alphabet guys, Richard, Stinson or FDA's opinions, then do NOT buy the item, WITHOUT researching the signature(s) if possible. This part of the Hobby has taken a HUGE hit lately, and its now time for the COLLECTOR and HONEST DEALER to start being more proactive and less reactive to someone else's opinions

Scott Roberts

Why is it whining? It doesn't have anything to do with being comfortable with them or not, it's about them following the rules and doing what their LOA says it does. Most collectors have no idea if they check every autograph or not. If they aren't, shouldn't people know about it? Why a free pass?

Again, the argument surfaces that someone shouldn't be held to standards as long as they are better than "this guy" over here. As long as there exists this guy over here, the bogeyman, then someone who may be better than him only has to be better, not the best they can be.

Its the old addage, that if we are on a camping trip, it seems futile for me to put on running shoes to outrun a grizzly bear. my response would be that I don't have to outrun the grizzly, I only have to outrun YOU!

[sago]

Regarding OP's thoughts on the Buck Leonard 150 autograph piece, I have some thoughts as well.

It's a limited edition of 1000, but it's not clear if it's a signed edition of 1000.

I would guess that it's a signed edition of 1,000 as the signatures are just too organized. They were probably signed in the same place by each person.

Given that, it was most likely signed at an organized event. Should take about a minute to find a possibility.

http://buckoneil.com/articles/one-la...eball-history/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_Awards_%28NLBM%29

Why would anyone want or need JSA, or anyone else for that matter, to provide an additional "opinion", rather than rely on the "fact" of who and who was not there?

BTW, http://www.ebay.com/itm/Babe-Ruth-Au...item4cfc8db6b0

seems more of a secretarial signature. It's more likely to be an actual game used ball than a signed Ruth.

[canjond]

Here's one I love!



Heritage did the right thing and pulled it.

Ball wasn't made until the 1970s, but somehow signed in1959. Looks like both PSA and JSA missed that.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by canjond

Here's one I love!



Heritage did the right thing and pulled it.

Ball wasn't made until the 1970s, but somehow signed in1959. Looks like both PSA and JSA missed that.

missed it by that much.

you would think they check the ball out first before they even looked at the auto.

but what concerns me just as much is that they thought the auto was good. any auto that looks like that they were willing to pass, and we know its no good as wilson said it is a 70's ball. so back to the drawing board for Cobb, but what do I know, the pre-eminent Cobb opinionators took their shot at it, and struck out I guess. I'm just a lowly boxing guy. Mr. Zipper told me what for.