Don't be tempted by this one . . .

That’s a single (weak) indication.

By weak you mean not helpful (for counterfeit detection)?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I did too.

 

There is a thread on Coincommunity about this coin - (How is this 1888S SLQ so obviously a fake?)
Some knowledgeable people are saying that if it's a fake, it's a very good one.
To me, it looks like a fake, and not a very good one...but hey, I'm just a hobbyist.

I'm following with interest....

Has @Insider weighed in yet?

 

For what it’s worth, here’s a link to another 5-E (with the same die clash under “WE” in IGWT) that’s graded MS66. Both the eBay coin and this one have similar weaknesses in “LIBERTY.”

https://coins.ha.com/itm/seated-qua...9.s?hdnJumpToLot=1x=0&y=0#auction-description

 

Yes, I joined there and started that one to get some more opinions.
One other knowledgeable member there responded:
"...with most of the diagnostics on this coin matching a known Briggs variety, I see no reason to doubt the authenticity; "mushiness" can be caused by a wide variety of things ranging from weak strike pressure, to die wear, greased dies, and PMDsuch as abrasive cleaning.

Without a weight measurement and metal content testing such as XRF, I would be loath to brand this coin as a fake."

So all of the experienced people there did not fall on the 'fake' side.

 

I received this same image of the shield from the seller via eBay messages, and it opens up clear as a bell, but does not transfer here to the CT site with enough definition. The incused LIBERTY is in excellent condition except for the die polished 'BER' section.
If you do not want to take my word for it, the seller would likely be willing to directly send the same image to anyone who asks.
To me it looks like the weird luster and VKBs question about the motto edges are the remaining flags.
Are there examples of fake dies being created to create counterfeit LSQ's to this level of exactitude?

 

Just for your consumption generally, at the Anti-Counterfeiting Task Force meetings, they will admit to each other privately that many of THEM have gotten burned by Chinese fakes recently, and these are the top people on the field. So there’s that. It is FAAAAAR worse a problem than the vast majority of numismatists are even aware of.

 

Guy opinions are usually correct. If you have to explain away multiple issues to try and convince yourself something is real it almost always isn’t. Unless someone’s gonna buy it and send it in for grading there’s really nothing left to say. If someone wants to think it’s real they can explain it enough to think it could be, but unless someone gets it there’s just nothing that can really be added.

And yes fakes can be very good, there’s a reason why PCGS has an AI system studying them and helping with identification of them now

 

OK thank you, previous two. It sounds like there is still a fairly wide gap in knowing exactly the methods actually being used. And moving target no doubt.
I'm sure the pros at the ANA, PCGS,NGC etc. can only judge by what comes across their desk, in terms of keeping up with new developments.
In terms of detection, the quote I copied above (12:18 p.m.today) led to a further discussion with that fellow. Please see if my synopsis about magnet testing rings true:
Saying the magnet test is "highly specific for fakes", we mean it is good for confirming that a genuine coin is indeed genuine. It is not likely to report a fake when the coin is genuine.
"Saying the magnet test is non-sensitive means that if a coin is fake the test might miss it. It might well report a coin as 'healthy' when it is a fake. It is prone to false negatives.
So the magnet test is not a great way to be sure, if in fact we are presented with a counterfeit."
Sure would be nice to have a weight on this coin!

 

Exactly. And this post perfectly explains why:

 

I think it's probably genuine, but has been heavily dipped affecting the luster and leaving some black gunk around some devices. The weak BER is explained by die polishing (per the Briggs book), otherwise the devices appear very sharply struck and the usual tip offs to a transfer die forgery aren't apparent to me. If it's fake it's extremely well made, and far better than about any of the Chinese fakes usually seen.

 

"...with most of the diagnostics on this coin matching a known Briggs variety, I see no reason to doubt the authenticity; "mushiness" can be caused by a wide variety of things ranging from weak strike pressure, to die wear, greased dies, and PMD such as abrasive cleaning.”

I'm not sure where you are going with this. This ungraded, mushy strike coin posted for sale on the internet by an antiques dealer who doesn't deal in coins is suspect to me. Period. The second word "most" in the post you quoted to convince me that the coin is genuine only re-enforces my position that it is a counterfeit. To convince me a coin is genuine ALL of the diagnostics must match a known variety. The difference between MOST of the diagnostics matching and ALL of the diagnostics matching is the difference between counterfeit and genuine.

 

I am not trying to convince anybody that the coin is genuine. But some posters jump to conclusions. It doesn’t matter who the seller is and it doesn’t make a difference that he’s in the UK.

> To convince me a coin is genuine ALL of the diagnostics must match a known variety.
As we only have low resolution pictures of poor quality, we can’t possibly “match all diagnostics”.

 

Location and seller absolutely do matter. It’s not as likely for something to be real over seas from a non coin seller as it would be in the country of origin from a coin seller or specialist. Every detail about the offering always matters.

The UK isn’t a location like Asia where everything would be assumed fake, but that doesn’t change the fact that a good fake would be much more likely to be able to be passed off there than here. Same goes for someone who isn’t selling primarily coins

 

Maybe it was graded AU/details and he cracked it out of a slab...? That’s all I am saying... and yes, a fake could be more easily sold outside of the US. I agree.

 

Excellent! Now please channel that passion into continuing the study of counterfeiting.

You are the victim of a miscommunication there. The quote was partial and in fact ended with "Without a weight measurement and metal content testing such as XRF, I would be loath to brand this coin as a fake."

So he was agreeing with you that the call could not be made on existing evidence, as micbraun said in his reply.

 

Well the bidding is in AU territory.....at least we didn't hurt the auction....maybe helped it?.

 

I'd be more confident in bidding on the coin if they had a disclaimer that if it's fake they'd eat a bug.

 

This discussion has been extremely valuable to a returnee to the discipline after such a long break. Thanks to all for weighing in with the various perspectives.

Aside from the book Detecting Counterfeit Coins and the ANA classes, this thread has mentioned The Spruce website, which has a section about good detection tools to own, plus good further recommendations. Maybe we could continue to share any other current resources on the topic. I might be missing it but I do not see an established topic on this.

P.S. Have not heard from the OP since this all got started - love his avatar. I have the identical old desk as far as I can tell.