Mantle, Williams and DiMaggio: Authenticating Baseball Forger Favorites

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

9 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Barry Courtright on April 29, 2011 at 5:15pm

Thanks guys. If you are pretty sure on the Mantles, I wont bother getting higher quality photos. But, if seeing a higher resolution would help, I can for sure do it. Anybody with thoughts on the DiMaggio photo and ball, and the Williams ball? You guys are very helpful, thanks again!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on April 29, 2011 at 5:43pm

Barry,
I recommend uploading clearer shots and getting more opinions. I'm not doubting Zipper and Chris, but you have the opportunity to get many more opinions, and I wouldn't pass that up.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Larry Rosenbaum on May 2, 2011 at 8:57am

Barry, sorry to say from your scans I'm not confortable with your items. If you can send better scans I'll respond again

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charles Paul Brenner V on May 7, 2011 at 6:04pm

Hi, Love this guys . Great Job. Here is some Joe Stuff that I think deserves looking at. the first picture is of an obvious Joe forgery. I mean just look at that J..ugh, I ordered this and returned it immediately. And the second Ball is from Joe's 70th birthday in '84. it has Dom. Bob Feller, Charlie Feller, Vic Ruschi, Lefty Gomez, Tom Henriech, Mee Allen, Lee Hapat, and Joe. These were acquired in person and so, of course, I don't doubt them. The thing about Joes signature was that he started the J high and hit the laces on the bottom loop and then did like a makeup swoop. The question is, would you just treat this real ball the same as this fake ball because of the messed up J? ... Thoughts..

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on May 8, 2011 at 7:19am

would you just treat this real ball the same as this fake ball because of the messed up J?

My thinking on "messed up but real" autographs is this...

I can live with a less than perfect autograph if it is messed up in a way that doesn't hamper authenticity concerns. While the J isn't perfect, it's not the kind of thing a forger would ever do... a forger would likely get a new ball and try again until it looked "right."

However, if I knew a signature was real, but it was so messed up that everyone else would always doubt it, I would avoid it in the first place. I prefer to have examples in my collection that I don't have to "explain."

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on May 8, 2011 at 7:41am

I think that's a good policy, Zip. But I do enjoy discussing whether an irregular autograph is real or not. And I might want it in my collection...although not as the main example.

When I had a coin shop I had a collector whose goal was to collect the most worn example he could find of every US coin. His only condition was that you had to be able to read the date...and mint mark if it had one. It was fun.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charles Paul Brenner V on May 9, 2011 at 3:04pm

I agree, But my question was directed at what an outsiders point of view would be of these signatures. Would he see that Joe just messed up when he hit the laces and not dismiss it as a forgery? also I've been looking at some of Joe's signatures in his later life, on baseballs especially, and was noticing that he might have had trouble making his J. I saw a ball he signed , which had a witness photo, a friend personally had autographed, and he had messed up the J as well, but the dimaggio part was perfect. It made me reconsider if I had done the right thing by returning the ball from the first picture, which had almost the exact characteristics. Does anyone else have personal experiences of Joe in his last days having trouble with his J's? Personally, I think it adds character to my 70th b-day ball that Joe showed his age when he signed it, but I just can't accept something like that in the first picture. If the first ball truly isn't a forgery, than the only person that this would be valuable to is the person who personally got the signature. Like you guys said, I avoid my 70th bday ball when showing people my baseball signature collection and just stick to my clean stuff, but balls like the 70th bday ball are great conversation pieces.

P.S. how are Authentic Autographs Unlimited still credible? they authenticate Everything!! I just saw a ted williams, Mick ball that made me want to barf and, of course, it was authenticated by AAU. Whats the story on them?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CJCollector on May 9, 2011 at 3:22pm

I have yet to see an autograph "authenticated" by AAU that in my opinion was authentic. It was AAU, along with Stat Authentic (Ted Taylor) and Morales, that "authenticated" that Lou Gehrig signed jersey on the Pawn Stars reality show.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ken Emery on May 9, 2011 at 4:48pm

Hello I'm new to collecting and am reading alot about forgeries.... Is there anyone who could be recommended / believed for authentic autograph verifying...more specific Marilyn Monroe / Joe DiMaggio collectables, baseballs, photos, letters? Thx for any help

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brandon Mysinger on May 31, 2011 at 9:54am

This is exactly the way I handle my NASCAR examplar collection. I start with PERFECT signatures. After that, I try to get signatures that show as many variations as possible.

It's important that I continue to add perfect examples of each driver's signature to the collection each year though...after that is done, I continue to focus in the variations.

With as many autographs as the drivers sign, you simply HAVE to have these variants in-hand. I'm sure it's the same in other genres.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve on May 10, 2011 at 11:36am

I have a Dimaggio 16x20 that he signed for me at a show in San Francisco in the early 90's. He signed it so poorly, that I had to get rid of it. You would never think it was authentic in a million years. I had him sign two 16x20's, a ball, and an official home plate that I have 44 Hall of Famers on. He originally siad he would sign the plate, then he changed his mind, then he said ok. When he signed his name, I asked him if he could add HOF and his year as all the other signers had done. He looked at me, puased and then put HOF (wouldn't add the year). He then scribbled his name on the 16x20 as if he were mad at me for making the previous request. I'll add the photo this evening.