|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Babe Ruth help, please
This is not my autograph, but I know where to go to see if it is likely authentic. Please let me know your thoughts so I can pass your comments along to the owner.
Thanks for your help.Screenshot_20220304-133031_eBay.jpg |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
It just doesn't look right to me.
Some of the curves don't look natural, and some of the letters look to be "constructed". Steve
__________________
Successful BST deals with eliotdeutsch, gonzo, jimivintage, Leon, lharris3600, markf31, Mrc32, sb1, seablaster, shammus, veloce. Current Wantlist: 1909 Obak Howard (Los Angeles) (no frame on back) 1910 E90-2 Gibson, Hyatt, Maddox Last edited by Steve D; 03-04-2022 at 06:18 PM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Not authentic IMO.
Last edited by rand1com; 03-04-2022 at 06:34 PM. Reason: Add content |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you. I'll pass that very constructive feedback along. I felt uncomfortable with it too, but wanted to get confirmation from the experts on this board. Thanks again.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Not a chance. Look at some ruth hand written checks..All the numbers are wrong.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Agree with all the comments above, those folks are better at this than me. One thing really stands out to me as not being authentic and that is the transition between the 'R' and the 'u'. That link does not look natural and to me appears to maybe have been added after the first attempt of the auto.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I agree with all of the comments. Many thanks for sharing your opinions.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not debating any of the conclusions above, and am not an autograph expert of any kind, but it's always odd to me that people talk like there is only one type of Ruth signature that is legit. As to Ruth or anyone else, isn't it far more likely that signatures can change a significant amount from when someone is 20 years old to 40? I think of myself. I see signatures from 25 years ago and they really don't look a lot like my scribble today. And aren't there going to be examples where someone signed something quickly or maybe reached up into the stands to sign something or was walking down a street and their signature will look lousy just because of the circumstances. Just has always seemed really peculiar that people are confident enough to quickly view a signature and say it's off.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I'd like to learn/understand the why with the reasoning as well.. Regards, Butch Turner
__________________
“Man proposes and God disposes.” U.S. Grant, July 1, 1885 Completed: 1969 - 2000 Topps Baseball Sets and Traded Sets. Senators and Frank Howard fan. I collect Topps baseball variations -- I can quit anytime I want to.....I DON'T WANT TO. Last edited by butchie_t; 03-07-2022 at 08:46 AM. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Horrendous forgery. Not even close. Without a shadow of a doubt 100% fake.
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not debating any of the conclusions above, and am not an autograph expert of any kind, but it's always odd to me that people talk like there is only one type of Ruth signature that is legit. As to Ruth or anyone else, isn't it far more likely that signatures can change a significant amount from when someone is 20 years old to 40? I think of myself. I see signatures from 25 years ago and they really don't look a lot like my scribble today. And aren't there going to be examples where someone signed something quickly or maybe reached up into the stands to sign something or was walking down a street and their signature will look lousy just because of the circumstances. Just has always seemed really peculiar that people are confident enough to quickly view a signature and say it's off.
It’s off. Ruth’s autograph most certainly did change. If you look at one of his autographs from 1920 and compared it to an autograph from 1927 and compare it to an autograph from 1948 there are most certainly some changes. But the example shown here doesn’t fall within any of those parameters. Ruth actually took great pride in his autograph. For every 1000 authentic examples you will find MAYBE handful that were ‘rushed’. Handful meaning < 5. Last edited by Bpm0014; 03-07-2022 at 02:23 PM. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Just like Mantle... everyone always talks about the "slanted t" which seems to show up only about half the time. The truth is a TPA's guess is probably the same or even below the opinions of most of the people on here. As for the Ruth, my gut feeling is no. I don't like the second "b" in Babe, but as mentioned above it could be debatable for sure. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
With all due respect, no, this cannot be debated. Anybody who is even remotely familiar with Ruth’s signature will tell you that this is a pretty bad forgery. There is zero debate. Again, will all due respect. I’m not trying to sound like a jerk. It’s just a pretty poor forgery.
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Agreed. Poor forgery.
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
David, totally agree with the separate letters. To clarify, it looks to me as though the beginning of the "u" was added after it was signed.
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: 1921 Exhibit Babe Ruth & 1926 W511 Babe Ruth | pencil1974 | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 02-17-2016 03:45 PM |
FS:R315 Babe Ruth,1920 W516 BABE RUTH, Mathewson 1927 York Walter Johnson,Hoyt ROOKIE | vintagehofrookies | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 23 | 03-20-2015 05:36 PM |
SOLD!!! BABE RUTH! 1951 RAISIN BRAN BABE RUTH RING! SCARCE PINK! Ends Mon 3-31! | GoldenAge50s | Live Auctions - Only 2-3 open, per member, at once. | 6 | 03-31-2014 07:23 PM |
FS: 1921 W516-2-2 Babe Ruth & 1926 W512 Babe Ruth Panel | pencil1974 | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 01-12-2014 03:46 PM |
1932 Sportoscope Babe Ruth flipbook; Home Run by Babe Ruth anyone know the value | RichardSimon | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 3 | 11-16-2010 01:14 PM |