We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

Babe Ruth signature opinions

Hi everyone, I'm hoping to strike a very good discussion, so I just recently bought Ron keurajians autograph reference guide 2nd Ed. I'm really enjoying it, lots of great info in it and I've been really trying to study babe Ruth's autograph. I've been reading hauls of shame articles on operation bambino and I am really curious, are there any legitimate babe Ruth baseballs that are in good shape, that were actually signed by him.Ive learned that some forgers have Ruth's signature down and can create some well executed forgeries like the ones shown in the operation bambino articles. I do know that one big tell tail to those forgeries is the basebaline of those forgeries are like a straight line and lack the bouncy sort of whimsical attribute to genuine Ruth baseballs. So, I've been scrolling through eBay looking at baseballs seeing if I can determine whether or not a babe Ruth baseball is authentic or a forgery. By reading Ron keruajians book, I've began to not trust psa or jsa, as they have authenticated Ruth forgeries in the past. But the first 2 examples I want to show you look very similar and my first thought was they are forgeries. The third example was me trying to pick out what looks to me a real babe Ruth baseball. I could be very wrong with what I just said, I don't know, I just started studying his signature. I am looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts. I am not looking to purchase any of these baseballs, as I do not have anywhere near the money to pay for a Ruth autograph. I am just looking to gain knowledge on Ruth's signature

0 members like this

Attachments: No photo uploads here

image.jpg, 95 KB
image.jpg, 248 KB
image.jpg, 339 KB

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Christian Peluso on February 13, 2019 at 4:01pm

Anyone?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on February 13, 2019 at 4:12pm

Hello, I would look as much or more at the dedications/inscriptions as the signatures. Many forgeries fail with the handwriting. A good starting point to help those who will answer might be if you state why you think the PSA/DNA ball is not genuine.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christian Peluso on February 13, 2019 at 4:43pm

for the first the ones in blue ink, they just looked so very similar especially in the baseline of "Ruth" and the placement of the "th" and the line going through them. I know Ruth signed thousands of items and I know everyone of his signatures has certain characteristics that make them authentic, but these two just looked very similar.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on February 13, 2019 at 8:12pm

First, let me start with the positive aspects of the "To my little pal" ball.

1) The T and the F in To and From. Flawless. That's his type of track. The correct lift and starting point, angles, change of pressure during execution of those letters, etc., etc.

2) The invisible "connections" after each letter small 'e'. Look at how the direction of the 'e's once terminated, if continued, would link up perfectly to the next character he writes after that 'e'. That's typical of Ruth. Not always, but for the most part.

3) Not only the crossing of the 't' in Ruth is perfect and utterly convincing, but the crossing of the two "t's" in the word "little" predictable for Ruth and consistent, especially when compared to the crossing of the 't' in Ruth.

4) Those are Ruth's number handwriting at the end of his life.

Cons:

1) the 'a's are rounder and more open than most typical Ruths.

2) the baseline dips uncharacteristically at the 't' in "Ruth".

3) the ink itself is a really strange shade and super bold for ink that is supposed to have aged for 70 years! And when I see this shade of green as the end result of usually an aged blue or black fountain pen ink, it always leaves me wondering, "Where were all of these MINT signed baseballs with this bright green ink 30 years ago? Why did so many of them show up in the past dozen years?".

The cons said, aside from the ink and how clean this ball is, looking almost artificial, like it was cleaned in some way, and concerning the actual mechanics of the signature itself and nothing else,

Because so many things that are typically missed by forgers are perfect on this ball and very typical of Ruth, the "too open" a's, and the droopy baseline at the Ruth's 't', are far overshadowed by the strong points.

Any forger skillful enough, and with the control and mastery of a Ruth forgery under his belt to an amazing extent it would take to get everything right that I mentioned in the first 5 points, would have drawn this with a better baseline and narrower 'a's.

So IMO, it's good. I just can't explain where all these mint Ruth baseballs with mint signatures are coming from that I've been seeing over the past dozen years. They sure weren't around with this abundance 30 years ago!!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on February 13, 2019 at 7:49pm

Was busy the past week. Going to take a look at this thread and opine soon.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christian Peluso on February 13, 2019 at 8:08pm

No problem woody take your time, I just can't rap my head around how there are so many Ruth forgeries and at least for me it's hard to which ones are real

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on February 13, 2019 at 10:13pm

In the day, before Ruth forgeries could make a killing by skillfully forging his name, there were still many proxies, or "secretarial" signors for Ruth! Clubhouse guy, batboy, Joe Dugan, golf caddy, the wife, ghost signors galore, not so much forging his signature but authorized/hired by Ruth or this and that company to do it. The demand for his signature was staggering while he was alive, and up until this day.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christian Peluso on February 14, 2019 at 4:36am

Thanks so much woody, great in depth analysis. I would assume you were talking about the two in blue ink, what did you think of the third one in black ink. And one question did Ruth always have his r in “Ruth” so close to the t or just have it touch completely. Or is that a sign of a forgery. Cause on the operation bambino baseballs, most of them have the r touching the t

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on February 14, 2019 at 12:03pm

The 'e' to 'R' spacing is narrow because of the extra width of the bottom portion of the 'e'. Going by where the tail of that 'e' terminated and the start of the 'R' began, that invisible link is fine. Though the space appears to be smaller than usual, that lift/connection is preserved beautifully. All the e's here end right, which would take enormous control to forge this in its entirety to get so many other things right, and that, the path, in this case, is preserved in the 'e' to 'R' connection as well.