Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Daniel S. on March 22, 2019 at 12:51pm

Authentic?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Spillane on March 22, 2019 at 1:36pm

From what I can see, I think they're both good.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel S. on March 22, 2019 at 1:54pm

Thanks alot, John! 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on March 22, 2019 at 3:56pm

Daniel, the Williams looks odd to me. No matter how hard I try to read/see "Williams", I'm seeing "Nilliams". I don't remember any period in Williams career when his "W" was as nebulous as this, appearing here more like an upside down W than right side up! Do you see that as well?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on March 22, 2019 at 5:21pm

no doubt the W is very strange.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Spillane on March 22, 2019 at 6:19pm

I saw one like this, somewhere last year., that came with a psa and a jsa and when I saw it this time, I was more comfortable with it. You don't see that Williams sig too often with that "W" The Ted looks fine to me. I hope to dig up the other one to compare.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel S. on March 22, 2019 at 7:31pm

My initial concern was that the “Williams” looked different than everything I had previously encountered.  That being said, I have zero experience with Ted this early in his career.

I am curious what John turns up for comparison.

 How does the Foxx look to you guys?

thanks guys!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel S. on March 22, 2019 at 7:37pm

https://www.psacard.com/autographfacts/baseball/ted-williams/46

this looks a little closer 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on March 23, 2019 at 2:25am

Not really closer. There's no mistaking the sharpie one for a W.  Although there are those here that are Williams guys and I'm not, of the thousands I've seen over the years, I've never seen the "Nilliams", or what that really looks to be an upside down W! IMO, it's a one of a kind, and not in a good way.

Also compounding the oddity of the W is how high the starting point of the 'i' is after the W. Looks almost like he's starting a W there too. When I first saw it, I thought that starting point of the 'i' was the W! Very oddly formed W and 'i', in my opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel S. on March 23, 2019 at 5:12am

Evidently, that link pulled up the first image, as opposed to this one that I intended to highlight

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Woody2Shoes on March 23, 2019 at 3:47pm

Ahhhhh. There it is. Nilliams. And that explains my misinterpreting the end of the "W" for a too tall start of the I, because that slash was part of the "W", not the start if the 'i'. This exemplar clears it up considerably.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel S. on March 23, 2019 at 7:23pm

Do you feel that I can purchase with confidence?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page