Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by LuckyLuke on September 23, 2013 at 4:19pm

Hi William....as usual..thank you for your valued opinion.

Lucky.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on September 23, 2013 at 4:46pm

I'm really wrestling with this one.  At first glance it looks close, but when I magnify it, and evaluate each letter, there are areas of concern.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LuckyLuke on September 23, 2013 at 4:56pm

Apparently the autograph was examined by a forensic examiner also,....besides GAI. His opinion was that it was authentic and that the signature was indeed from the 1930's and that the ink was iron based and that the signature was done with a nib pen. I know GAI 's reputation....not good at all. Don't know if this is just more noise...or helps at all.

Lucky

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on September 23, 2013 at 5:21pm

honestly Luke, it doesn't.  I dont trust the opinion of ANY TPA.  are they correct most of the time? the top ones are, yes. but there are enough mistakes made where I just can't accept their opinion blindly.

Of course, the age of the ink and paper are important, and that cannot be determined from a photo.

I am basing my opinion on what I see.  I usually err on the side of caution, so this could very well be authentic.  

for example, the L looks a little shaky.  the i slants to the right, which is uncharacteristic.  

just my opinion, of course.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LuckyLuke on September 23, 2013 at 5:54pm

Thanks for all your invaluable input! Great forum...great people!

Lucky

• ▶ Reply