Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by LymanBostock Fan on December 19, 2014 at 9:40am

I think when you take all the oddities of this Munson signed photo, I've found other Munsons that have similar characteristics when putting together different parts of the Munson signature.  I think the probability of a forger taking all these different characteristics and putting them together in one signature is very small, especially when you add in the story behind my purchase of this photo.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Null on December 19, 2014 at 12:01pm

One thing you want to avoid even paying any attention to is the "story" behind it. I've heard a million "stories". You can get caught up in any "story" you want. It should always just come down to the signature and let that speak for itself. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LymanBostock Fan on December 19, 2014 at 11:05pm

I personally think the story is important when you are talking to someone credible, or whom you believe to be credible.   For example, many years ago I bought a signed Roberto Clemente card.   Personally, I think Clementes are very difficult to authenticate.   The card I bought had a letter of provenance from the original owner who supposedly got the Clemente in person, the seller whom I bought it from knew the original owner, etc.   Of course, I also believed the signature looked as good as I could tell.   Hence, at some stage, should I decide to part with this signed card, this original letter will go with the signed card.   To me, its more valuable than any PSA/DNA or JSA letter of authenticity.   So, to me, if I can get something that looks good, but has a story with it, its that much better.   But, agreed, you do have to watch out for people who fabricate stories just to dupe you.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on December 19, 2014 at 9:50am

Guys this is a very interesting debate. I have been studying Munson signatures for almost 35 years and have owned several. You can do all of the technical comparisons that time will allow. But all it takes is just looking at the signature and it just does not look correct. All of the other munsons presented here as authentic likely are. There is no degree of comparison that can convince me they the one in the subject photo is authentic. The Th is ok but the rest of the signature just looks way off. Baseline,flow , letter formation. It's all off in my opinion. But again this is a great discussion.
I will add, however, that most forgers screw up the upper slant on the h. This one looks fine.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LymanBostock Fan on December 19, 2014 at 10:03am

Terrier,

I appreciate your opinion.  I've been studying Munson signatures for the same time period as you.  If I saw this signed photo without any story behind it, I would probably agree with your opinion.  It is the story on how I got it, which pushes me the other way.  Let me ask another question:  Let's assume its fake.  Certainly, the forger would have had to know Munson's signature and known it quite well.  They would have had to have known how he signed early on and later, unless it was forged in the 1973-1975 time frame.    At that time, forgeries were rare.   Also, why have no other forgeries like it hit the marketplace? Authentic Munson autographs on photos are in the $1000-$3000 range.  (Granted, this one would sell on the low end due to the tape issues).   It just doesn't make sense to me that someone who got so many Munson characteristics right on this signature wouldn't forge a lot more.  I realize what I say isn't going to make you change your opinion, but I'd like some thoughtful answers to the questions I just asked you.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on December 19, 2014 at 1:30pm

aside from just the signature itself, I do not recall blue sharpies being used before 1976-77 time frame.  by that time, his signature had migrated to the Th'an Muns__ that represented his signature the last 4 years or so of his life.  one of the important characteristics to his later signature is the signature break after Thu.  It was almost always there.  This appears to be an attempt at his early 70's signature, but the sharpie seems to be in conflict with that.

I do agree with your thought process as I use it frequently. if this forger is so good, why are there not more?  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LymanBostock Fan on December 19, 2014 at 10:06am

I do hope you're not including the 1979 PSA/DNA authenticated Topps card, which some poor sucker paid $17, 779 in a Mile High Card auction in 2012!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on December 19, 2014 at 10:53am

I always questioned the authenticity of that 79 card. In fact I had an email discussion about it when I saw another exact same signature style for sale on eBay. I mean exact down to every letter. I will see if I can find it. I did not mean to include that card in my general statement.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page