Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Insider, post: 2601271, member: 24314&quot;]Merry Christmas everyone!&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>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: &quot;We ain&#039;t got no life!&quot;&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Well, I can see that some here, including myself, &quot;ain&#039;t got no life either.&quot;&nbsp; Santa came last night after church for us.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>After reading this thread again, especially Post #53, it&#039;s my opinion that the question of a MS/PR-70 should have been answered; yet I cannot stop thinking about it.&nbsp; IMO it is not as complicated as we&#039;ve made it.</p><p><br /></p><p>SuperDave, posted: &quot;It&#039;s a crapshoot; you can see 70&#039;s in a 69 slab and 68&#039;s in a 70 slab.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>I already answered this <span style="color: #660000">myth</span>.&nbsp; You show me any coin in a MS/PR-69 slab and I will show you why it was not graded PR/MS-70.&nbsp; Except for the rare occasion when a tiny mint-made defect that is normally considered OK by a TPGS&#039;s standard is mistaken for a &quot;hit,&quot; this does not happen.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; Therefore, I don&#039;t need to make the &quot;hit or mint-made&quot; determination. </p><p><br /></p><p>Super Dave continued to write that 70&#039;s exist and there is a difference between <span style="color: #660000">as struck</span> and <span style="color: #660000">as struck and meeting the criteria of perfect.&nbsp; </span>&quot;The OP coin which started all this is an excellent example; <b>the die used was not capable of striking a 70</b>.&quot;&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>SuperDave posted about coins making MS/PR-70: &quot;I still think it somewhat coincidental that they came about at the same time in that it&#039;s doubtful the Mint was capable of producing them repeatably (as opposed to accidentally) before the advent of TPG&#039;s.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>This was answered.&nbsp; The TPGS&#039;s had nothing to do with the MS/PR-70 grade or the perfect coins that existed before those services were founded.</p><p><br /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>There should be no misunderstanding of the word perfect.&nbsp; The only group that did not understand it was the TPGS and they needed to modify their interpretation of the word &quot;perfect&quot; 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 &quot;perfect.&quot; </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Usually the tiny Mint-made imperfections are allowed to pass as long as they are no many in number and too distracting or hidden.&nbsp; 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. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>If the flaw on the die is small and not detracting.&nbsp; Most flaws that we see were on the planchet or impurities introduced to the dies during operation.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Agree in part. The human factor is the &quot;judgement&quot; part.&nbsp; The debased standard of perfection by the TPGS&#039;s is another.&nbsp; Put both these together and the number of MS-70&#039;s that people can dispute rises.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in