Jackie Robinson autograph card - Your thoughts?

[mrmopar]

I bought this on ebay in the late 90s and it was part of a larger group of signed Dodger cards. Most of them looked pretty spot on, but this and a 57 Campanella were possibly questionable. I was comfortable with the price for the lot assuming Campy and Robby were fakes, so I am not out anything on this deal either way. I have always assumed that this was likely not real, but since I had no plans to deal it, I just told myself it was real and went with it. I have never really sought opinions on it, professionally or otherwise.

I have tried to assemble a complete team set of signed 1956 Topps Dodgers, but the big 4 were clearly major hurdles to a budget conscious collector. I sadly have to consider my team set "complete" without any of those 4 (Campy, Hodges, Koufax, Robinson).

Since there seems to be a solid and confident knowledge base here, I thought I would toss it out and see what the group thought. Any chance this is the real deal?

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Ew


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ATP]

No, for many reasons.

[Republicaninmass]

And not even close

Sorry

[mrmopar]

I will say that I can't find another image online of his signature that is not all on a single plane, so that there may be reason enough to call this one out as bad.

What other clues do you guys see? Just looking at some of the scans online, I wouldn't say to my naked eye that it is not even close. It definitely shares similarities with some authentic signatures. I'm curious, as you all have said bad, and I don't doubt that, but no details as to what you see or why. "Ew" is the clear winner so far though.

[shelly]

[ATP]

There are so many inconsistencies with the signature, but you don't really even need to analyze that. You can just look at the way the ink is sitting on it, and can tell that it was recently signed on an old item.

[keithsky]

If you said you bought it in the late 90's could be one of the Marino group autographs. The guys that got busted in the Operation Bullpen thing

[GrayGhost]

Horrible

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by mrmopar

I wouldn't say to my naked eye that it is not even close.

All the other naked eyes, including mine, are seeing it as not even close.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by ATP

You can just look at the way the ink is sitting on it, and can tell that it was recently signed on an old item.

I'm not sure that anyone could differentiate between 1970 and 1995 ink on a 1956 card. To me, it looks like a thin tip Flair.

[Econteachert205]

The k and capital r are not at all right. K looks like an h.

[ATP]

Originally Posted by Deertick

I'm not sure that anyone could differentiate between 1970 and 1995 ink on a 1956 card. To me, it looks like a thin tip Flair.

Look at the way the ink feathers out on some of the letters. If it were signed sometime in the vicinity of when the card was made that wouldn't happen. The fibers in the paper start to separate over time and the ink splashed out, especially when signed too slowly.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by ATP

Look at the way the ink feathers out on some of the letters. If it were signed sometime in the vicinity of when the card was made that wouldn't happen. The fibers in the paper start to separate over time and the ink splashed out, especially when signed too slowly.

Was gunna write pretty much the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1880nonsports]

that if the OP is unable to differentiate between the two autographs which are NEXT to each other - he should probably be careful from now on when accessing items in the medicine chest - often the toothbrush and razor are found in close proximity....

[jb217676]

Here is my exemplar for comparison...

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by ATP

Look at the way the ink feathers out on some of the letters. If it were signed sometime in the vicinity of when the card was made that wouldn't happen. The fibers in the paper start to separate over time and the ink splashed out, especially when signed too slowly.

I understand the principle. I am only pointing out that while it is possible to dispute a claim it was forged in 1957, a signature would most likely exhibit the same characteristics if it were signed in 1972, 1995, or 2008.

[gnaz01]

The ears don't match

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by jb217676

Here is my exemplar for comparison...

Night and day difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk