Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Coin Chat
>
ANACS RP/PRooF 70... But Not?
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Insider, post: 2601271, member: 24314"]Merry Christmas everyone! </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: "We ain't got no life!" </p><p><br /></p><p>Well, I can see that some here, including myself, "ain't got no life either." Santa came last night after church for us. </p><p><br /></p><p>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.</p><p><br /></p><p>SuperDave, posted: "It's a crapshoot; you can see 70's in a 69 slab and 68's in a 70 slab."</p><p><br /></p><p>I already answered this <span style="color: #660000">myth</span>. 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. </p><p><br /></p><p>Super Dave continued to write that 70'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. </span>"The OP coin which started all this is an excellent example; <b>the die used was not capable of striking a 70</b>." </p><p><br /></p><p>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."</p><p><br /></p><p>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.</p><p><br /></p><p> </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>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." </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. 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. 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 "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.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Insider, post: 2601271, member: 24314"]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 [COLOR=#660000]myth[/COLOR]. 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 [COLOR=#660000]as struck[/COLOR] and [COLOR=#660000]as struck and meeting the criteria of perfect. [/COLOR]"The OP coin which started all this is an excellent example; [B]the die used was not capable of striking a 70[/B]." 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.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Coin Chat
>
ANACS RP/PRooF 70... But Not?
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...