I have a couple of Mays auto'd balls and this card looks a lot different than both of the balls. (Not saying mine are the real deal, but I think they are.) Also, I don't remember seeing a Mays auto like the one on that card, although I guess it's possible that the sharpie has really distorted the sig.
STAY HEALTHY!
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
I'd say no. The only thing that I sometimes wonder with something that is that bad of a forgery being pawned off as real is if it was signed at something other than an appearence. I have a Dan Fouts auto obtained at a terminal in the airport that no one, even myself. would believe is real if I didn't see him sign it. So there is a SLIGHT possibilility that he presented Mays the card somewhere and Willie signed it sloppily while standing there holding the card in his hand. As for me, I still wouldn't touch it authenticated or not unless I saw him sign it myself. JMO
Collecting anything Dan Fouts, Jim Rice, Chris Webber, Ron Francis & Coming Soon: Aaron Hernandez.
That signature is from the late seventies early eighties. It is most likely authentic, all of the other examples people have shown to "compare" are examples from the past decade (with perhaps one exception). This is like taking a 1953 mantle sig and trying to campare it to a 1994 mantle sig, you can't. The sig is real in my book, but then again, you can never know.
<< <i>That signature is from the late seventies early eighties. It is most likely authentic, all of the other examples people have shown to "compare" are examples from the past decade (with perhaps one exception). This is like taking a 1953 mantle sig and trying to campare it to a 1994 mantle sig, you can't. The sig is real in my book, but then again, you can never know. >>
Not sure I agree with your time frame.
His sig with the Willie that looks more like a 4 has been around since 1992 - my son got his sig on a ball and bat and it looks pretty much like the one mrmint posted.
I really think the sig where one can see the "Willie" - as such (as I posted above) - is an 80s sig and perhaps earlier.
One can see his sig in 1952 was clear and along the way it got less and less readable.
Comments
Steve
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
I think gai was certifying the card,not the auto.
Needs'
1972 Football-9's high#'s
1965 Football-8's
1958 Topps FB-7-8
<< <i>I think gai was certifying the card,not the auto. >>
No, GAI CERTIFIED is how they slab the autos. This is supposedly a vintage signature in ballpoint.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think gai was certifying the card,not the auto. >>
No, GAI CERTIFIED is how they slab the autos. This is supposedly a vintage signature in ballpoint. >>
I was making a funny,I think the auto is off.
Needs'
1972 Football-9's high#'s
1965 Football-8's
1958 Topps FB-7-8
Successful Deals: tennesseebanker, jvette,
No con is going to fake a sig on that card with a crappy feltpen...... especially a living player who signed freely back then.
PS that card is worth far less now than if it were unsigned IMO
Here's one of his transition sigs from his really early clean sig to his newer sigs which are not recognizable as Mays IMO.
<< <i>I say it's phonier than the proverbial $3 bill!
Steve >>
not to get off track, but I have a $3 bill listed on Ebay right now. I real one!
$3 Dollar Bill
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it"
<< <i>That signature is from the late seventies early eighties. It is most likely authentic, all of the other examples people have shown to "compare" are examples from the past decade (with perhaps one exception). This is like taking a 1953 mantle sig and trying to campare it to a 1994 mantle sig, you can't. The sig is real in my book, but then again, you can never know. >>
Not sure I agree with your time frame.
His sig with the Willie that looks more like a 4 has been around since 1992 - my son got his sig on a ball and bat and it looks pretty much like the one mrmint posted.
I really think the sig where one can see the "Willie" - as such (as I posted above) - is an 80s sig and perhaps earlier.
One can see his sig in 1952 was clear and along the way it got less and less readable.
I would say that any signatures where the W actually resembles a W, is from no later than the mid-late 1970s.
Steve