ANACS RP/PRooF 70... But Not?

Totally changing gears here and getting back to the OPs coin. Doesn't it look to anyone else like there is a major flaw on the sun? Not just the mark on it...but there appears to be a significant amount of frost on the sun itself. A small amount at 4 o'clock and a large amount at 9-12 o'clock. Almost looks like a fairly significant die flaw. Unless the photos are just playing tricks on me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Sorry, there is no "nice" card in my deck. When I made a false statement or gave an incorrect answer I got wacked or at least berated by a Jesuit priest! But in this case, my bad ...I thought "The Coin Show Podcast" was a place people could go to get educated about coins.

Nevertheless, the fact that you do not have a show has nothing to do with the misinformation you have posted and so far are holding on to and believe: "There is no such thing as a perfect 70."

You are free to believe anything you wish and opine anything you believe as true. You can post misinformation based on limited research/knowledge too.

I resent being called out as a bully for attacking your opinion when I or anyone else can prove what you have posted is 100% false. I expect the same treatment by others here if I post BS! That's all.

 

did you even read what I posted?

That aside, you're calling opinions false and they are just opinions...

take a chill pill, and stop trying to be the person with all of the answers, your opinions are exactly the same... opinions. and you're just as entitled to them as I am mine.

 

Then why do you come out with absolutes like, "There is no such thing?" Physician, heal thyself.

Anyone who knows me well, knows I'm derisive of TPG 70's. It's a crapshoot; you can see 70's in a 69 slab and 68's in a 70 slab.

But they exist, despite your absolute. PCGS is the best at identifying them, NGC is hit or miss, and nobody else seems to have the first clue. And that is holding to Cascade's standard of "perfect 70" as opposed to "as struck." The OP coin which started all this is an excellent example; the die used was not capable of striking a 70.

There is a point past which you will see things which were on the die, perfectly transposed onto the coin, and you must think to yourself, "Is this a deliberate part of the design, or not?" It is both counterintuitive and self-deceptive to think that it isn't_possible for a baseline, nominal planchet to receive a prototypical strike from a fresh die, and then be handled in such a fashion as to avoid damage.

There is a point past which you must question if you have the knowledge or judgement to arbitrate whether the microscopic feature you're seeing is deliberate or not. You didn't design or cut the die, and have never held one under similar magnification to the images you're evaluating.

My passion for this topic grew from my previous certainty that 70's didn't exist. Evidence has proved me wrong, and there's enough of that evidence out there for me to be certain that anyone who believes 70's don't exist, just hasn't done the research.

 

Dave... I deeply respect a lot of your opinions, and I wouldn't exactly accept 70s quite yet, except to say this.

MS(PF)-70 coins did not exist... until the TPGs started to slab them. Now they do. Those are facts and not subject to argument.

the argument is... are the TPGs right?

 

I'm in the camp of perfect coins do exist but perfection is not neccisarily the standard for a 70 but damn close to it is.

 

All I'm saying is I have not seen one. Every coin graded a 70 that I have ever seen appears to have some kind of a flaw...I have yet to see one otherwise. Perhaps these flaws are subtle "design elements" cut into the die...I will never know because you are right...I didn't cut the die or design the coin. But neither did the TPG grader. I'm not saying that I'm 100% certain that they don't exist...all I'm saying is that I have never seen a coin graded a 70 that I can't find a flaw of some kind on...and as a result my personal opinion is that they don't exist. Until I see a coin that changes this opinion, it will remain.

 

Fair.

I regularly see coins whose flaws - if they exist - are at the level where I must question whether what I see is appropriately defined as a "flaw" or not. Indeed, whether the original designers and creators of the die could so define it. For me, the point at which those definitions govern is where 70's begin.

Although I wholly blame TPG's for the "hype" surrounding 70's (which, for clarity's sake, I'm sure we agree are only to be found with Proofs and NIFC coinage), 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.

On the flipside, it's I who am the silly one for attempting to force a definition of what constitutes a 70 from someone who doesn't believe they exist. Mea culpa.

 

I think what you have posted above can be said in a clearer way so no one can disagree.
Let me enlighten you. I should have said let's get into the "Way Back" machine and examine your quote based on actual numismatic history.

"MS(PF)-70 coins did not exist... until the TPGs started to slab them."

Actually, perfect coins (PR/MS-70) have existed for longer than even @GDJMSP has been alive. They really became abundant when late 20th Century coin production came about. However, you are correct in one twisted way...Since THERE WAS NO GRADE OF PR/MS-70... These coins were not recognized. When I was a novice, the highest grade was PR/MS-65 so many of the perfect coins (70's) plus all the 68, 67, and 66's (that existed for years before I was born) were lumped in with the MS-65's because they did not exist either.

"Now they do."

Bingo! You are correct again, now they do. As best I can remember, in the late 1990's (?) one of the grading services graded something (Barber quarter?) MS-69 and the flood gates opened. I listened to one of the owners of a top two TPGS say there was no such thing as a PR/MS-70 coin and we won't ever grade a coin 70. Today, I'll bet there are well over 400,000 70's in that company's slabs.

"Those are facts and not subject to argument."

There is nothing to argue. A person is either informed, confused, ignorant, or a combination of the last two. The only "fact" is this: While PERFECT coins have existed for decades it took pressure from the commercial coin market to recognize those coins with a grade of 70!

"The argument is... are the TPGs right?"

Ditto the first two sentences above. Very often the TPG's are correct. BTW, as I posted before. The TPGS often have a little wiggle room as to what makes a PR/MS-70. The actual PERFECT CONDITION OF PRESERVATION of a coin has no wiggle room. The coin is either perfect or not. The grader's opinion is the only thing subject to argument. Make sense?

Hopefully, by the end of this thread, we'll all agree that perfect coins do exist.

 

If we don't...I"m sure you will "enlighten" us further.

 

That's a good one. Lucky you won't be working on a patient's teeth tonight.

You can hate the messenger all you want. There is not much more to add. The concept of a perfect coin is an easy one taught in Coin Grading 101. So are the NGC examples in the ANA Grading Collection. If you get the chance, you may put the grading class on you "bucket list."

Hopefully, at least one or two readers of this thread will learn something from the time I've taken to post my experiences.

Oh, and PERFECT COINS DO EXIST...by the hundreds of thousands.

 

You can get some very good deals buying the 70s in the 69 slabs too.

 

Having spoken with and knowing several TPG's past and present over the years...I have never, ever, seen or heard of a major TPGS MS-69 graded modern coin or SE upgrading to a 70. That counts for little so...

Obviously, the chances are in a million coins it must have happened (let's exclude hanky-panky or criminal intent) but I'll bet if so, it has only been successful on .0001% of the attempts.

 

Quote from Louis Golino in Coin Week Sep 10, 2010:

"So what exactly does a grade of 70 mean? Is it really a perfect coin with no imperfections or blemishes of any kind? Are all 70’s created equal, even from the same grading service and in the same coin series?

These questions are not easy to answer, but from my own study of the issue and experience with such coins, I agree with the view that 70’s are not actually perfect and that they can vary in quality.

I consulted the just-published third edition of Coin World’s Making the Grade: Comprehensive Grading Guide for U.S. Coins, which is published by Amos Press and was the last major project of recently-retired Coin World editor Beth Deisher. It refers to MS70 eagles as “perfect” and “free of defects.” In the section on the five-ounce America the Beautiful silver coins, it says a 70 coin is “flawless” and has “pristine surfaces with a full strike.” But PCGS and NGC have yet to grade a single ATB coin as a 70 because the very large surface area lends itself to marks and abrasions.

My understanding is that to the naked eye a 70 should look very close to flawless, but depending on the level of magnification used when examining the coin, a couple very minor flaws can almost always be found."

 

Quote from Louis Golino in Coin Week Sep 10, 2010:

"So what exactly does a grade of 70 mean? Is it really a perfect coin with no imperfections or blemishes of any kind? Are all 70’s created equal, even from the same grading service and in the same coin series?

These questions are not easy to answer, but from my own study of the issue and experience with such coins, I agree with the view that 70’s are not actually perfect and that they can vary in quality."

This is my opinion... I don't know who Louis Golino is but he's probably well meaning and interested in helping collectors. Nevertheless, IMO, this is the kind of that confuses people and leads to threads like this that turn what should be a simple concept into a discussion of what if's.

"What exactly does a grade of 70 mean?" Dah? I'll use the quote from Making the Grade that @davidh posted: "A 70 coin is “flawless” and has “pristine surfaces with a full strike." That's basically how most knowledgeable numismatists should define it. Please note how EASY TO ANSWER that was.

"Are all 70’s created equal, even from the same grading service and in the same coin series?" Dah? All coins that are actually "flawless" with "pristine surfaces and a full strike" ARE certainly equal. The OPINION of a TPGS based on their interpretation of "flawless" has nothing to do with the definition of perfection and the actual condition of preservation of the coin. It is either flawless or not. If a grader or collector misses a defect or ignores it and the coin is graded 70, that does not make it so. Thus we must deal with two things, a coin's true condition and the opinion of its condition on the label. Again, this was EASY TO ANSWER and shoud be easy to understand.

@davidh wrote: "My understanding is that to the naked eye a 70 should look very close to flawless, but depending on the level of magnification used when examining the coin, a couple very minor flaws can almost always be found."

This is (naked eye) the way many inexpensive modern coins are graded. That is the main reason that all coins GRADED MS/PR-70 are not equal!

PS There are many flawless" coins with "pristine surfaces and full strike" graded MS-PR-70 by the TPGS's.

 

I hoped you would enlighten us...now please close the thread as you said it all.

Thanks for correcting me that the MS-70 grade came about long before the 1990's. It would be interesting to know WHEN the first 70 grade was given to a coin and what it was.

 

This was pretty much exactly what touched off the fire storm, Doug. I said that "there is no such thing as a perfect 70" and the bonfire ensued from there with accusations from insider about how I was spreading misinformation when all I was doing was expressing a viewpoint and an opinion.

It then further devolved over the accusations, rather than a discussion of people's viewpoints, and insider now saying he doesn't know who Louis Gallino is (Coin World Staff writer), but he is sure that he means well and is interested in helping collectors. :sigh:

I could further explain my point, but there is no sense. It is only my opinion.

 

Reflection