Very Rare Great Britain 1951 Proof Halfcrown, GTG

This grade has REALLY gotten under my craw. I bought the set nearly 20 years ago from Spink and believe it to have come from the Pretoria Mint collection deaccessioned several years earlier. Please note the perspex plastic has some scratches on it, these are not on coin - I apologise and will try to get better pictures later. The reflections are awful on the surface so hard to get.
So guess if the coin really is rare or not, and if you think it is, grade if you like.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Have to go with MS65…and I think I see doubling on the OWN/CROWN.

This is a very nice coin…Spark

 

Good spot there. I concur with the guess.
Can you identify if this is a rare coin or not?

 

Very nice example, I go MS65 rather than a PF grade. As to whether it is rare, I have no idea, there were 20,000 Proofs also struck and 2 Matte Proofs are known.

 

So by set, you are saying Proof set? Krause doesn't show a mint set prior to 1953. The 10 coin 1951 proof set is valued at $300 with the proof half crown going for $35 in Krause for pf63. The 1951 proof matte is the rare one with only 2 coins known for photographic purposes. Can't tell from your pictures the finish (matte or brilliant) but my guess is the regular proof and not the rare matte. I don't have the coin in hand but know that grading proof coins from photographs is almost impossible unless the photos are very high quality and in focus when you zoom in.

 

I will try to do better on the photos, they do seem to not reproduce well and shooting through plastic and not getting glare is problematic. Tried to give a hint in the title & probably would not go to Spink in London to get an ordinary coin....

 

Based on the title I'll guess "very rare" but a low grade of PR 62

 

PF63

 

I'll put it to you like this - if it is actually only a 62 or 3 I would eat my hat. Here are a couple more pictures, the surface is NOT reflective (there is some evidence of the minting process on the top margin of the shield and in some of the devices on the reverse):

 

Not my area of expertise but with the square rims and nice level of detail in the King's hair (especially around the ear) it could be a proof.

 

Indeed, it is. Not the ordinary one however.
This is the extremely rare matte proof.

 

This one was graded by NGC as Matte Proof 66
https://www.coinfactswiki.com/wiki/Great_Britain_1951_half_crown

 

Wait until I do the grade reveal later today, I almost wretched.

 

Ah nice - I was sure I'd seen 1951 proofs for sale recently (not too expensive) but they were cameo proofs.

 

The one graded by NGC has an extremely sharp reverse & i mean seriously sharp.
The OP's coin shows a lower quality of strike on the Reverse including mushy details on the shield designs.

If this is one of only 2 known, why such a difference in quality ?

 

Well, not sure of that however in hand it doesn't look too bad. This is from the Pretoria Mint and bought through Spink about 20 years ago. The Grade?

Matte Proof 61! This coin has NO hairlines, no rub and is absolutely and completely original not messed with. They have done this sort of grading with matte 1927, 1937, 1950 and 1953 coins as well, not to mention the satin 1924 issues.

Now in my humble opinion, again backed by my good friend Steve Hill (who BTW does not particularly care for grading), this grade is entirely inappropriate based on wear. I may suggest that image quality is not the best over my phone and I struggled greatly to try to get pictures through the plastic.
The other thing is that these matte proofs were created [supposedly] by blasting hand picked ordinary proofs with a medium, not necessarily sand. So this was at best an uneven process with some evidently receiving more "treatment" than others.

 

That does seem low. I don't think the TPGs know these too well so they grade like any other coin (without taking into account the unique process of how it was produced).

 

I'd rate it higher too, but as we all know, the inconsistency in assigned grades comes with the territory. We can all show examples where there is general disagreement.

I bought a 61 off a US collector who couldn't live with the label, which, label aside, was an upgrade to a 65 I already possessed.

Thankfully I don't pray to the great label god, but if I did, I'd miss out on so many coins.

 

Who graded it ?
I see no mention of where you sent it.

I would like to see a picture of your coin raw, it's not good trying to make a comparison through plastic.

Does this mean you will be eating your hat or did it need to grade 62-63 for that ?

 

Uh, no won't eat hat. That was a PCGS graded coin, and I left it in plastic -although I have considered removing it. As to who graded it, I have no idea as that is somewhat of a secret. I think Steve would be the foremost expert with regards to this coin as I must remove myself.
Their pictures to follow below.