Decided to start a new thread... Local memorabilia shop confirmed live ink and we removed it from the frame. It was processed in the mail in 1937 based on the reverse side. Took a few more photos before we packaged it up for JSA

the shop owner who’s been doing this for 40 years. “I strongly believe you got lucky as hell.”

Views: 2585

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Steve you have no facts to base that on... none 

everything I told you was correct, did I try to influence their decision no. But I didn’t want a predetermined conclusion because Kevin Martin has testified in court against JSA and PSA. I didn’t want sour grapes. I wanted it judged solely on the autograph. It was purchased from an estate sell, I didn’t say I was the one that purchased it... might want to work on your basic reading comprehension skills Steve... and why do I have to put the full chain of custody in there for the sole purpose of a quick opinion? Shouldn’t it be judged for what the visual evidence is for a quick opinion. All the Research I’ve done I’ve shared with this board and to other authenticators...100% transparent. I posted screen shots of the quick opinion that was literally purchased the moment the auction was live, and immediately removed when the results came back

honesty and straightforwardness are extremely important? That you are a laughable excuse of that Steve. You and others liked the autograph till you heard how much I paid and that it Kevin Martin purchased it from an estate sell. You did a complete 180, unlike Woody. No one had integrity in that moment. 

I could literally back up every word I’ve spoken here with screenshots,  but it wouldn’t matter. And I could prove I could of sold it if I wanted to, and didn’t. Which proves I did it for the sole purpose of the quick opinion. I mean if I thought it was forged and was out the $1100 wouldn’t anyone take the $1800 and run...

you have no leg to stand on here Steve, none. 

Also the truth is Steve I’ve don’t more leg work more research and put more effort into researching the legitimacy of this autograph than I bet anyone has for any piece of their collection.. but your right I’m a dishonest dude peddling forgeries.

why don’t you research my selling history and you will see anything I’ve sold has a legit COA from Beckett or PSA attached to it 

Just for clarification. PSA and JSA don’t provide COA’s they provide opinions.

Notice how the rudeness and name calling starts as soon as the story starts to fall apart.  Completely uncalled for.

You also are ignoring the fact that I’ve paid for two opinions from Beckett, two from PSA, one from Steve Koschal, one from PAAS, one from Richard Simon. Paid a frame shop to take it out and examine in, and paid JSA $250 to authenticate it. So I have over $350 into trying to authenticate this signature 

but yeah, I’m a dishonest dude try to pass off forgeries on eBay.. 

I might have missed it in the thread. What was Richard Simon's opinion? Based on the Ruths pictured on his website, he's got some opinions accompanying the images that are on the money. His opinion on Ruth authenticity can be taken very seriously, IMO.

I’m sorry,  but he is calling me a liar essentially.

The story never fell apart. You can believe a false narrative or you can believe the screenshots I posted. It’s that simple. I could post screenshots and back up everything I said. 100%. And have done so regarding the auction and proved my motive it doesn’t matter. So yeah I basically think he has come up with a false senile narrative that is based on little facts, when in fact he has showed more of lapse of integrity than myself 

Sorry it’s basic common sense. I applaud Woody for seeing this for what it is. And that is noting more than a very diligent effort to find this signatures origin, and to have as many notable eyes look at it as possible to verify it’s legitimacy. 

I have never once attempted to defraud anyone, never have and never will. Any signature I have ever sold has been with a reputable LOA or opinion from the big three authenticators. Again I can prove that. 

but we can’t let those pesky verifiable facts get in the way of a false narrative over sour grapes can we?

$350 and no better off? Hmm. Do you consider this money wasted? Did any of these entities say WHY (either way)?

I don’t consider the money wasted. 

Except on Beckett, they literally made three separate decisions on this. I only had one come out and say they believe it to be non genuine and that is PAAS. 

if JSA returns it as authentic I will feel good that piece is authentic because the majority of people I have consulted agree. 

IMO, $1800 is a lot of money. As far as autos go, it's not a whole lot to go through a lot of histrionics for. If someone is trying to run a scam, it's a lot of work for $1800 compared to buying an extensively scuffed Hendrix album from a thrift store for $1.00, sitting down at the kitchen table with likely a forged exemplar, and drawing an unconvincing forgery over the scuffs on the album, then selling it for $44,000. There's a heck of a lot less work in doing that and a lot more profit than spending so much time trying to foist a very convincing Ruth on the hobby for $1800. Just my observation that if deceit and spurious sales are the goal, signed albums, cast signed posters, and more would offer a lesser path of resistance. A lot more gullible buyers for a lot more money than this Ruth. Just talking logic and practicality.

Unconvincing forgery? LMAO! The ink has very clearly been removed in areas where the pen pressure is light, and has been damaged in areas of heavier pen pressure.

Very astute observation, Ballroom. There appear to be areas where the lines have been lightened by "erasing" or rubbing. It's clear in the top of the R.




  • Add Photos
  • View All


  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2019   Created by Steve Cyrkin Community Mgr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service