Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on May 11, 2020 at 3:09pm

ok, I will bite.  why do you feel this is a forgery?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve on May 11, 2020 at 4:23pm

I’m curious as well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joel Figueroa on May 11, 2020 at 7:13pm

I studied Clemente signatures since 30 years ago year by year,  that signature is not authentic. There some of these balls around there, signature in the same spot...I saw few of them that failed authentication since the ball are from different eras, seems to be that this one was <60 era and PSA authenticate it but Im 100% sure that this ball was not signed by Mr. Clemente.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joel Figueroa on May 11, 2020 at 7:18pm

See another example: this ball was signed for the same person that signed the other one. Not Roberto ClementeE424AB01-C02F-4B19-B6D9-DB41168C0CE7.jpeg 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on May 12, 2020 at 5:37am

Im with you on the second one but I see differences between the two.  A forger who has masterred a certain style will duplicate it.  That is how they get caught.  One looks ok, but when you see several identical, it raises flags.  I still think the one you posted is good.  but thanks for bringing this out, its an interesting topic.  If you have more examples, please post them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joel Figueroa on May 13, 2020 at 12:32pm

Both are fakes.

the flow and letter formations for the first one is not from Mr Clemente hands.

you can see that on the letters “er” from Roberto and “Clemen” from Clemente.

and fresh ink... obsoletely fake.

too much years studying Bob signature.

crazy how PSA authenticated that item.

 

• ▶ Reply