I’m not a fan.
beckett authenticated it
I should have clarified. I think the signature is good, I’m not a fan of the photo.
I purchased it from pristine auction for $80, which I’m surprised it didn’t go for more. It has his stat sheet below.
Beckett authenticated, but was curious if those on this site concurred
I love the know it alls on here! Can't even own up to a screw-up. You do a full about face once you hear Beckett, and then claim not liking the photo which you can't even see. Just admit that you do not know your Williams signatures.
Actually Jackass, I know them very well. I was referring to the photo. I should not have been typing when I was having a conversation with someone. I may not know every signature, but I do know arrogant ass when I hear one.
Sorry, but I am not going to stoop to your level. You know you can not see the photo, but lie all you want. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
That is a photo? :) Poor painting...
Don't demean members.
While the idea behind this site is completely honorable and helpful, I have noticed there is a contingent of people on here that have no idea what they are talking about, yet pass themselves off as armchair warriors that have all of the answers. Too many times I sit back and shake my head when a member asks about an opinion on a signature, then these armchair warriors throw in their two cents worth, and then tuck tail and about-face when confronted with a follow-up certification from either a preferred or demeaned TPA. If one's opinion is that a signature is bad, why does it matter if it turns out to be authenticated by a preferred TPA? On the flip-side, if one's opinion is that a signature is good, why does it matter if it turns out to be authenticated by a demeaned TPA? If these members continue to flip-flop on opinions based on TPAs, isn't that counterproductive to the ideas behind this site? I have no problem calling out PSA/DNA, BAS, JSA, or GA for any bad things they may pass. I also have no problem admitting that a signature might actually be good even if it comes with a COA from GFA, Coach's Corner, or any one of numerous 'forensic document examiners' even though there are numerous members on here who claim "I have never seen an authentic item authenticated by (insert hated TPA name here)". When a question about the validity of a signature comes up, if we are going to respond with what is supposed to be a helpful opinion, the idea should be to help with authentication of the individual signature, not defer to what certification comes with it. It just gets on my nerves when I see that this is the basis for supposedly helping with authenticating a signature. Thank you for reading this and your understanding, Mike.
"... If one's opinion is that a signature is bad, why does it matter if it turns out to be authenticated by a preferred TPA? On the flip-side, if one's opinion is that a signature is good, why does it matter if it turns out to be authenticated by a demeaned TPA?..."
Some of us don't care about TPAs' at all...
I can see the photo just fine, thank you. I have seen it in full previously. I have been on this site for over 10 years and have never flip flopped once. I also do not comment unless it is a signature that I am very familiar with. I got distracted when I was making my comment, simple as that. You on the other hand seem to have quite a bit of pent up hostility. Walking and talking like a big girl does not give you the right to make an assumption based on what you think I was thinking. Then telling me that I cannot see a picture that I am clearly seeing makes me think that you have some medical issue that needs to be addressed quickly. Spend a little more time worrying about yourself and less time making assumptions.
If you are as dissatisfied with this site as you say, please do us all a favor and look for another site with more honest, kind, and knowledgeable people. I'm sure you won't find it, but please feel free to leave and put your allusions and spiteful feelings to rest.
© 2023 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin. Powered by