Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on January 31, 2013 at 5:47pm

words of wisdom, Christopher

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CJCollector on January 31, 2013 at 5:44pm

I will admit I was too quick to call that Mantle ball a forgery.  The photos are obviously authentic.

As for the ball, I've seen hundreds of rushed Mantle sigs.  But I won't be convinced it's authentic unless it was in my hands to examine.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CJCollector on January 31, 2013 at 5:31pm

Mr. Zipper, I will admit that I did not look closely at that Mantle signed ball.  Now that I have taken a bit of time to look at it, it does somewhat contain those Mantle characteristics, but I'm still not certain.

I'd like to have that ball in my hands.

The photos are obviously authentic.  I knew the second photo would catch a few off-guard. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brandon Jones on January 31, 2013 at 5:29pm

Steer clear my friend.  These are horribly bad!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CJCollector on January 31, 2013 at 5:32pm

Seriously, Brandon?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony on January 31, 2013 at 5:33pm

I must admit this has been a great conversation and learning expirence...always get great advice and incite...thank you

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Null on January 31, 2013 at 7:21pm

Photos are authentic, the ball I'm not sure, I think it is probably rushed authentic IMO. It's almost like he was looking up when he was signing the "M" in Mantle and didn't realize how far off he got.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brandon Mysinger on February 1, 2013 at 3:33am

Zipper said it best, there have been threads after threads after threads of people discussing and expecting a "cookie cutter' / "perfect" signature of Mantle. When in reality, the signatures here show the truth of autograph collecting. Now, imagine if some poor TPA would have had their coa attached. WHOOOAA! We would have had at least a page worth of saber rattling and calls for the TPA to be shut down.

Now, you have to ask did any of the TPA Mantle "experts" turn this down for a coa? I have no way to be certain, but i would bet the chances are high that this would have failed at least one of the majors TPA opinionator's examinations. Again, thus is the hazard of years and years worth of expecting and focusing on "cookie cutter" / "perfect" Mantle signatures.

I'm actually glad to see authentic items of his which has some true in-person "life" to them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carl Ryan on February 1, 2013 at 12:50pm

Thats true Brandon. I was way off on these. I thought they were all most likely forgeries, and felt sure the ball was. But thanks to the experts here, no bad advice was given. But as far as the TPAs go, i personally would rather a TPA fail a questionable item rather than pass it. Its so hard to say what the TPAs would have done with the ball, but when dealing with authenticators, i would much rather see a questionable item failed than to see a company just cert near every item that comes across their desk. And their seem to be a handful that do do this.

And on the same token, this is a great example that speaks highly for the TPAs. We all know they screw up, but many many many times, items are posted here where the poster is laughing off the item and couldnt believe that any TPA would ever cert them. Followed by a rant about how horrible the 2 major players are. But then as the opinions come in, typically the consensus turns out positive for the TPA. Typically the item in question, that the poster thought could never be authenticated accurately, turn out to actually be pretty darn consistent with authentic examples.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on February 1, 2013 at 12:58pm

If you are a tpa one would hope that they would give it more attention than I did when I incorrectly opined on these. In any event I would rather have someone thumbs down or offer no opinion on something that could be authentic than to authenticate something fake

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Baldock on February 1, 2013 at 6:02pm

I wouldnt dare challenge some of you guys on these things .My expertise is getting him on about 10 things at shows in the eighties and trying to learn his sigs on here reading your posts. Watching him at shows he always gave nice sigs that I saw. I still wouldnt buy the last 2 sigs because they are oddball  and still dont like the baseball, just my opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CEE GEE on February 4, 2013 at 5:02am

I did not realize how many guys commented on this since then but here is my take on these....at first glance I would say all 3 are authentic....the first photo is just fantastic...I like the little sloppy ink mark on the first M which is not so appealing to the eye but I like very much...the first one is the best of all 3...the ball is really really bad....and even though it is bad the traits are there...but I can see the ball failing because it is just so sloppy...I can see authenticators not wanting to back that piece up...there are positives on the ball but I personally would not want that ball at all just because it is that bad...now the final photo...the Mantle portion itself is not very common more of the rounder softer type...those are out there although not as common and as neat but it is authentic....the Mickey portion with the MI I personally would not want either because it just does not look appealing to the eye...I can say that some times on Mantles if one or two letters are off to authentic formation it does not necessarily mean its not good...BUT that is not an exact science either...seeing enough fake and authentic Mantles its a little easier to judge the formation...but for me...I would only buy the top photo...the second two I would not want just because of the sloppiness...that being said...in my opinion there all good...one thing about a good and bad Mantle that the forgers will never achieve is certain flaws or traits in Mantle's auto...

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page