ANACS RP/PRooF 70... But Not?

We call those "varieties" around here. Get with the program! (j/k)

I hate to revive this aspect of it, but one thing everyone has missed is that (IIRC, I can't find my book at the moment), PCGS standards say that a 70 is (paraphrasing) "as struck, with full strike". That would clearly mean that a flawed die could be capable of striking a 70, but that not every coin struck by a pristine, brand new die would be a 70, either.

Under this interpretation, it's no surprise that out of the billions of US coins struck over the years, some of which have been specially handled at the mint (proofs and NCLT), that a relative few got a full strike and remained as struck by the time we collectors got our grubby paws on them.

That's another point to remember, especially when looking at images. Many of the coin images you see on here or other sites are the equivalent of vastly more than 5x magnification.

We already have half grades, with the + designation. I think those are kind of pointless, too. When we get to a point where coins can be cracked out, resubmitted to the same service, and come back with the same grade 10/10 times, then I'll be all for decimal or + grades.

This is, of course, more of a problem with MS coins than circulated coins, but I'm sure we've all seen a coin that really, truly falls in between, say, AU55 and 58.

With MS coins, I'm sure what a lot of people are doing is calibrating "this is what MS63 looks like," vs "this is what MS65 looks like," vs "this is what MS67 looks like," and interpolating the rest.

And there, finally, is the real problem with the 70 grade: it's completely binary. And, it's not a technical issue. Make your definition, apply it to every coin that comes in, consistently, and, eventually some will make the 70 grade. The problem is the inconsistency of humans as I mentioned previously. And, that is why we have this argument.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yep, that's the beauty of learning how to grade.

 

Quite. But my real point was that even professionals who have decades of experience and have graded hundreds of thousands of coins still disagree.

 

I understood your point and completely agree. As long as it is subjective, those with knowledge are going to disagree, that's perfectly natural. We are arguing about a literal point on a seventy point scale. Why? We are all right and will purchase properly as long as we follow our own perspectives and have educated ourselves of the series. This is one of my favorite large cents. PCGS called it MS-63, and I don't really disagree, but if I found it raw, I would be an AU buyer. There's no real visible wear, but had toning distractions and rubs that would give me pause.

 

If an expert, professional with decades of grading experience and adequate light and magnification (forget anything over 40X and no SEM allowed) cannot find any imperfection on a fully struck coin - it's a seventy! There are thousands and thousands of these coins in the market or in collections. PERIOD!

 

Why would they? That would be a purely technical grading system when they prefer eye appeal and luster over just a 100 percent technical system. The market as a whole does not want a purely technical system either. Whether they considered using it in a way or got the rights to make other people pay if they want to use I don't know but I seriously doubt they will fix something that isn't broken switching to a standard people overall would complain about.

 

I would think you could measure luster with the right lighting and sensor setup. Instead of tilting and rotating the coin under the light, have the lights themselves move.

Eye appeal is a little... harder. Maybe with machine learning you could do it, but I wouldn't begin to speculate further than that.

 

I don't think that the tpgs could ever really take the human out of grading, but the question of why would they is very obvious. The amount that some would pay for registry caliber coins is truly stupid at this point, and it would get even worse with decimals behind the grade.

 

I feel like this is what led to skynet and the rise of the terminators.

 

Unless you have Superman vision I don't believe you saw that mark with your naked eye. What amount of magnification did you use to find it?

 

It probably shows up at the correct angle under strong light. Your eyes are more sensitive to surface irregularities than you might think.

 

I saw it under my lamp light. It sticks out like a sore thumb to me.

To make sure it wasn't anything else, I used a 10x loupe.

 

Possibly but even then we all know coins with similar characteristics just sometimes don't look the same or ever close.

There are so many things that just don't work. What happens if a line of code is wrong, or trying to scan through plastic on cross overs.

I would made a large bet that if computers took over people would be complaining about grades even more.

First thought as well lol.

Second more serious thought would be how do you come out and say "We don't know what we are doing so here's a computer to figure it out"

I could see it as sort of an internal tie breaker possibly on something where there are significant disagreements, but as mentioned before how to you program the baseline

 

Merry Christmas everyone!

One of the funniest stories I ever heard happened late on Christmas Eve when one TPGS employee said to another who was also swamped with work: "We ain't got no life!"

Well, I can see that some here, including myself, "ain't got no life either." Santa came last night after church for us.

After reading this thread again, especially Post #53, it's my opinion that the question of a MS/PR-70 should have been answered; yet I cannot stop thinking about it. IMO it is not as complicated as we've made it.

SuperDave, posted: "It's a crapshoot; you can see 70's in a 69 slab and 68's in a 70 slab."

I already answered this myth. You show me any coin in a MS/PR-69 slab and I will show you why it was not graded PR/MS-70. Except for the rare occasion when a tiny mint-made defect that is normally considered OK by a TPGS's standard is mistaken for a "hit," this does not happen. Furthermore, my personal standard of perfection and the 70 grade does not allow for any imperfection on the coin including the rim but excluding its edge. Therefore, I don't need to make the "hit or mint-made" determination.

Super Dave continued to write that 70's exist and there is a difference between as struck and as struck and meeting the criteria of perfect. "The OP coin which started all this is an excellent example; the die used was not capable of striking a 70."

SuperDave posted about coins making MS/PR-70: "I still think it somewhat coincidental that they came about at the same time in that it's doubtful the Mint was capable of producing them repeatably (as opposed to accidentally) before the advent of TPG's."

This was answered. The TPGS's had nothing to do with the MS/PR-70 grade or the perfect coins that existed before those services were founded.

There should be no misunderstanding of the word perfect. The only group that did not understand it was the TPGS and they needed to modify their interpretation of the word "perfect" to be able to meet the demands of their major clients in the commercial market so that at least a certain percentage of an unopened group of coins sent directly from the Mint were judged to be "perfect."

Usually the tiny Mint-made imperfections are allowed to pass as long as they are no many in number and too distracting or hidden. When looking through a fresh roll of SE, it is commont ot find a progression of virtually identical defects that get less and less noticable as more coins are struck until they dissapear entirely.

If the flaw on the die is small and not detracting. Most flaws that we see were on the planchet or impurities introduced to the dies during operation.

Agree in part. The human factor is the "judgement" part. The debased standard of perfection by the TPGS's is another. Put both these together and the number of MS-70's that people can dispute rises.

 

I agree with you. I'll also laugh at the folks who buy MS-70's that were graded using a 5X standard.

It can be demonstrated that "standards" change. Wonder what magnification the computer will be set to when it finally arrives in the grading room?

One numismatic columnist has written several times that the diamond industry has a long-standing standard for a diamond to be called "flawless." I believe it is 10X. Nevertheless, when he was shown six "flawless" diamonds he asked to use the microscope on the back desk. The jeweler set it a 10X and was horrified to see him crank the power up to 40X and pick the diamond with the fewest flaws at that power! Asked why he did that, the fellow said, "standards can change in the future and I want your best diamond."

 

Merry X-MAS to all...This has always been a tough subject for me, as I have been called a perfectionist by many friends...I too have a problem denoting perfection in things, but in this case, the terminology reflects the need for a best grade possible. A grade which is better than almost perfect, the best of the best. The word perfect may not be the perfect way to describe what is believed to be the finest. The grade of 70 was intended to be the best attainable grade in Numismatics, but, as with anything, there can be imperfections which cause controversy. Perhaps there can be a more perfect way to describe perfection in grading standards.

 

I think the best way to do it, especially in view of the breadth of opinion expressed in the thread already, is choose your own standard and hold to it. And don't buy anything labeled as such which doesn't meet that standard.

 

Well..... I guess you could argue this till the cows come home! The way I look at when it comes to grading 70's, TPG's are not equal. It's about the $$$. Whether you buying,selling or just getting some graded. PCGS will command the highest price, followed by NGC, then ANACS. There are some exceptions but not many. If you have a PCGS 70, it's going to commanded "X" amount $$$.Whether you can see a speck or not. It's the TPG opinion that was asked for and received, so your opinion about the coin is now removed. Isn't that the purpose of the TPG's. So it comes down to standards, And the hobby say's (according to buying and selling prices) People will pay much more for the PCGS/NGC 70 Than they will for an Anacs 70 because PGCS & NGC has a higher standard.

 

Best answer. Ha!