Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 4952701, member: 112&quot;]No, I don&#039;t, for a couple of reasons. For one thing strike pressure at the rims is not low, in reality strike pressure at the rims is high. To realize that you have to think about what happens at the rim during the strike in tiny incremental moments of time. The metal at the rim is contained by the dies and the collar so the rim is the first portion of the coin to strike up. And once the metal at the rim touches the dies and the collar all the other metal is pushing against the metal at the rim increasing the pressure there. But because the metal at the rim cannot move anymore, the metal is forced inwards towards the center of the coin. And that pressure does not decrease until the dies start to open, come apart again.</p><p><br /></p><p>The other reason, planchet marks actually being at the rim is purely a matter of chance to begin with. But that chance is lessened because pressure occurs at the rim 3 different times. One is when the planchet is cut, the very nature of that action causes pressure at the rim and that pressure helps reduce and or eliminate any planchet marks there. Then when the planchet is put in the upset mill there is again, and this time very high pressure at the rim, further reducing any pre-existing planchet marks there. And then the strike occurs, again more high pressure at that location. So the rim is the least likely area of the planchet to retain any pre-existing planchet marks.</p><p><br /></p><p>That said, yeah there&#039;s always the chance that there will be some remaining planchet marks there at the rim, and there&#039;s always the chance that some of them will not be obliterated by any or all of the three pressure incidents. But the probability is low for that to happen, given everything else that does happen. So the most likely, the most probable scenario is that most marks on the rim of coins are caused by contact marks.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>That is exactly correct according to ANA grading standards, it is in fact spelled out and stated categorically. By ANA standards, no coin can be graded higher than 64 unless it is at least &quot;well struck&quot;. It&nbsp; doesn&#039;t have to be fully struck, but it has to be well struck before it can be graded 65 or higher. BUT - the TPGs do not follow ANA grading standards. And quality of strike is one of the grading criteria that the TPGs pay less attention to than almost anything else. And this is clearly indicated by all the high grade coins (over 65) that are obviously weakly struck.</p><p><br /></p><p>This specific point of strike quality being important is one that has been talked about, written about, and preached about by Q. David Bowers more often than just about anything he&#039;s ever discussed. He has gone so far as to instruct those looking for coins for him for his collection to give preference to coins of a lower grade that are well struck over coins of a higher grade that are weakly struck.</p><p><br /></p><p>edit - And CBD - one thing I meant to mention yesterday in my comments and forgot is that with small coins, like your dimes, contact marks are supposed to carry more significance, more weight, when it comes to grading than marks of the very same size and locations do on larger coins. This is standard grading policy. But the high grades given are a fairly strong indicator that this grading policy was largely ignored with your coins - purely because of what the coins are.[/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