Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on June 23, 2015 at 6:22pm

This looks like one of the styles that has been determined to be highly questionable.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Corrado on June 24, 2015 at 9:05am

Thank you for the quick reply!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on June 24, 2015 at 9:03am

Could be authentic IMO. What type is the baseball? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Corrado on June 24, 2015 at 9:05am

It says "hardwood official league"

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on June 24, 2015 at 9:24am

Ruth is very tough to authenticate especially from a digital pic.

As Terrier said, there are very good forgeries out there that have fooled the top 3rd party authenticators.

Having said that, I think this one is authentic.

Does it have a 3rd party authentication?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Corrado on June 24, 2015 at 9:32am

Thanks so much for your input, Randy. You guys are awesome. It does not have any authentication, unfortunately. I've never purchased a Ruth signature before, so naturally I'm very skeptical. Not really sure what to do. Of course I want to believe it's real, but like you said there are some very good forgeries out there.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on June 24, 2015 at 11:33am

I have bought and sold a half dozen or so single signed Ruth baseballs and even though from the picture, I think there is a good chance it is authentic, there is no way I would buy it without a return guarantee if it failed a top 3rd party authentication service.

Here's the problem. Even if it is 100% authentic, it will be virtually impossible to re-sell in the future should you wish to do so if it will not pass JSA and/or PSA/DNA. If it has a COA from either of them, it is easily sellable on the secondary market as it will be accepted by any major auction house as a legitimate autograph.

Another possible flag on this one is the fact it has not been authenticated. Most sellers realize the value of the COA from either of these authenticators and would never sell it as is unless they have had it rejected by them already or are pretty sure it will not pass.

I would proceed very carefully with a purchase of this ball as it stands.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeffrey Potter on June 24, 2015 at 11:50am

Be careful on this one, to me it looks like the reproduction Ruth baseballs that have been popping up lately. I have seen one on a Harwood ball as well. They are uniformly aged like this one but the ink, once looked at in person or under loupe, is clearly machine printed on. From a photo, it's almost impossible to tell because the signature looks authentic in shape and form. That was my gut reaction from just seeing the one photo, FWIW. Hope that helps.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Corrado on June 24, 2015 at 12:04pm

Jeff, you've made some great points. Thanks so much!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Corrado on June 24, 2015 at 12:05pm

Thank you Randy. Yes, I find it very strange that someone wouldn't spend the few hundred bucks to authenticate a ball that could potentially be worth a lot of money.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on June 24, 2015 at 1:33pm

this looks like one of the styles pointed out in this HOS discussion:

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=10406

It also lacks the "personality" of an authentic Ruth, in my opinion.  Seems stiff and lifeless.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Baldock on June 24, 2015 at 3:01pm

I think we have seen this or a very similar ball somewhere before. Check out Ruth balls on EBay. most are pretty faded. if this passes the "authenticaters" inspection it would be very valuable. Personally Im suspicious of it.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page