I know that in the world if baseball, and probably in the American sports world in general, the Bambino's autograph is considered the Holy Grail of autograph collecting. Now I'm not saying the Babe's autograph is necessarily hands down the most valuable. Ruth's sig is not rare, but it is always in high demand. I know that perhaps, in some cases, Shoeless Joe might have more value, but that is due more to scarcity. Babe's is still more desired.

But when considering Lou Gehrig's autograph, which signature has more value, all things equal? I'm not talking about single-signed baseballs. Due to it being more rare, I believe a SS Gehrig ball may have more value than a SS Ruth ball.

But let's take two distinct baseballs that are muti-signed, one that includes a Ruth autograph but NO Gehrig, and one that includes a Gehrig autograph but NO Ruth.

Let's say all other considerations are equal. Both baseballs are in relatively the same shape, both are the same type of ball, all the other signatures are of approximately the same value.

And finally, both Ruth's and Gehrig's autographs are on the sweet spot.

So which signature would make the ball more valuable? Ruth's or Gehrig's. Or would each ball be very close in value to the other?

Can any of the very thoughtful and knowledgeable baseball collectors on this forum shed some light on this topic? I'm really not sure myself, although in the proposed example, I would lean toward Ruth's signature adding slightly more value than Gehrig's. However, I also understand that Gehrig's autograph is the more rare of the two.

Any thoughts?