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

 It is unquestionable that Mickey Mantle, Ted Williams, and Joe DiMaggio have been American sports icons since the mid-20th century. It comes as no surprise that these three have been favorites of autograph collectors since the advent of autograph and card shows in the 1980’s. Unfortunately it is equally unsurprising, as attested to in the FBI’s famous 1990s Operation Bullpen, that they are also the three most forged sports autographs. Although most experts believe the forgery problem in sports memorabilia has lessoned tremendously since Operation Bullpen (estimated at that time to be “between $500,000,000 and $900,000,000” by the FBI), sadly large numbers of forged material still exist.

While it would require far more than a single article to educate the autograph collector to detect Mantle, Williams and DiMaggio forgeries, there are some general as well as specific warning keys to these three autographs that may aid in detecting possible forgeries.


Genuine Mantle, Williams & DiMaggio signed photo provided by EAC Gallery.
Click to enlarge:



 

As a general rule, one of the first things I examine in an autograph is its feel – how it was written. When an individual signs his name there should be an easy, smooth flow to the signature. We’ve all signed our names countless times, and we don’t need to think about it. An item we offered in one of our past auctions was a sheet of paper signed several times by Joe Jackson. Jackson, who was almost completely illiterate, actually had to practice, in essence work at, writing his name prior to signing documents. Likewise, when a forger writes a signature, he or she is working at it and therefore upon close examination it’s often possible to detect such warning keys as a slowness of motion, stops and starts at inappropriate spots, and possibly even a shakiness in the writing. An invaluable aid to help detect these keys, taught to me by John Reznikoff of University Archives many years ago, is to turn the autograph upside down. When you view an autograph in an unnatural position these warning keys are often easier to detect.

In addition to such general warning keys there are specific warning keys, unique to an individual’s autograph, to keep an eye out for.

In the 1980’s and 1990’s Mickey Mantle stated on numerous occasions that he was blessed to be able to earn more money signing his name at one single weekend show than his father had earned in an entire year working as a coal miner. Because of this Mantle always felt his fans were deserving of a clear, elegant signature. In authentic Mickey Mantle autographs Mickey would always end the “y” in “Mickey” on an upswing, and because he would be quickly flowing through his signature, he therefore started the “M” in “Mantle” on a higher level or plane than he had started the “M” in “Mickey”. Most forgers, because they were “working” on writing Mantle’s signature, would pause after completing “Mickey” and begin anew in writing “Mantle”, therefore placing “Mantle” on more of a straight line with “Mickey”. If one places a ruler or sheet of paper straight across the item Mantle signed (not straight across the signature) all that appears below the ruler or paper of an authentic Mantle is the bottom portion of the “M” in “Mickey”. In the case of most forgeries the ruler or paper completely covers the entire signature. Another difficulty forgers have with Mantle’s signature was his unique way of looping the bottom portion of his “M”. Such curved lines were executed in one easy movement by Mantle, but are most often elongated by forgers who again are “working” the signature. Such slow, elongated forgeries are especially easy to recognize on baseballs as their curved surfaces only add to the forger’s difficulty.

In the case of Ted Williams autographs, with the exception of the capital “W” in Williams, Ted would consistently make the size of all the letters in his last time nearly the same exact size. Most telling is the “illia”, with the “l”s just ever so slightly taller than the “i”s, and the “a” as tall as the “l”s. Try as they may, most forgers simply can’t undo years of training and habit causing their “l”s to be significantly taller than their “i”s, and their “a” significantly shorter than their “l”s. Williams also connected the “W” in “Williams” to the “ed” in “Ted” with a swirl that gave forgers difficulty in replicating in the same, easy, flowing movement as appears in authentic examples. Also of interest, in addition to the many Williams intentional forgeries in existence, Williams revealed late in his life that during his playing days his signature on team signed balls was often a “clubhouse” example, not penned by him.

Regarding Joe DiMaggio’s autograph, problems for forgers begin with the first letter in Joe. Like the “M”s in Mantle’s autograph, the “J” in “Joe”, which appears as two loops, a larger loop on top and a smaller one below, were created by curved lines which are the hardest to duplicate without leaving telltale signs of slowness or inappropriate stops and starts. In addition, DiMaggio would pen his “J”s so that the lower loop would be written on top of (literally written over) the upper loop in two places. For some inexplicable reason, a significant percentage of DiMaggio forgeries flow in the opposite direction, with the upper loop covering the lower one. An inexpensive magnifier or jeweler’s loop will aid in viewing this detail. Finally, the general feel of an authentic DiMaggio autograph is often somewhat sloppy, in the sense that the spacing between letters is uneven, obviously much more so in his second name. Again due to the fact that forgers are working rather than simply signing, the spacing they place between each letter is far more uniform.

Finally, the age-old adage “experience is the best teacher” is indeed appropriate here. The building of as extensive a library of exemplars as possible, of both authentic and fake examples, would be of help to visualize these and additional warning keys, and tremendously assist in the detection of forgeries.

Tags: authenticate, baseball, dimaggio, fame, forgeries, forgers, genuine, hall, hof, joe, More…mantle, mickey, of, ted, williams

Views: 75631

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

They don't have images, right? So unless you can identify the exact item in an auction lot, you're relying on the honesty of the seller...and anyone they bought it from, if that's the case.

What are your thoughts on this. This is the ball i was gonna buy as the auction LOA ebay # 290655001356. Seller looks good.

Disclaimer: Williams is a signature I am working on honing my skills.

That said, my sense is this is probably good. It has some good positive indicators.

based on the williams exemplars we/I've posted around here somewhere....

however, whenever I see someone state it comes with an LOA anything I would want to see that first posted (even with watermarks).  The description seems to be one of those boilerplate ones about 200%....

ok cool. Just risky with an auction house letter, but seller seems pretty good, i mean his name is something like iampsadna lol

Agreed...this looks like a good one

that ball is good, in my opinion

I see auction ended for it... did you buy?

The PSA one (& others) had images on it or at least the ones I have.  The "pre-cert" don't have anything except perhaps a copy of the catalog page and we can use R&R as an example.  With R&Rs however you get a cert from them and them only.

thus, if you are saying one MUST identify the exact item then all of the above be it auction loas or pre-certs are merely a marketing scam to give confidence to buyers that it is the real McCoy.  Nor should they be used as a ploy to give confidence and yet require even more costs to get an "official" cert

recall the discussion in one of these threads (probably a better place for it than here) I think one of mine as you know what a hot button issue with me this was regarding R&R.  There it indicated all the same steps were done by PSA (originally an auction loa) and then this pre-cert language that they do to authenticate.

For the most part this is true, but there are exceptions. My Cobb check has a JSA Auction House LOA that mentions date, amount and Payee. That’s good enough for me.  :-)

agreed.  The exceptions is what gives us all excedrin headaches!  I meant to say COA rather than LOA but I have seen the words interchanged.

when someone is using the ALOA it ought to be displayed (with watermarks so it doesn't grow legs) with the item so one can evaluate the accuracy of the listing or investigate the "authenticity" if need be.

This ball is really nice!

RSS

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service