Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="GDJMSP, post: 1310194, member: 112"]This is gonna be a long post. I didn't say you did say it. But the link you posted sure said it.   No. I didn't say that all. What I said was that you could never have crisscrossing lines on a die (and later on a coin) caused by die polishing. Die polish lines can never crisscross. Die scratches can crisscross, not only each other, but die scratches can also crisscross die polish lines. And die scratches can also crisscross with flow lines on a die. Even more so, I stated specifically that you can often find all 3 types of lines on the same die. Which coin are you talking about here ? The Morgan or the IHC ? If you're talking about the Morgan read what you find at the link you posted. "Easily confused with a whizzed or improperly cleaned coin, the 1921-S VAM-1i is attributed by the dramatically excessive amount of <a href="http://www.vamworld.com/Die+Polishing" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.vamworld.com/Die+Polishing" rel="nofollow">die polishing</a> lines on the obverse fields of the coin." "In the photo below, you can see why the polishing lines are sometimes confused as scratches from the abrasive cleaning of a coin." (these guys fail to notice that since it possible to be confused one way, it is also very possible to be confused the other way) They very specifically state that all of those crisscrossing lines are die polish lines. Well, they are wrong because it's impossible for die polish lines to crisscross because of the way die polishing is done. It simply cannot happen. That said I do not deny that those lines were on the Morgan die. What I dispute is what caused them. Those lines on the Morgan were caused by die scratches, NOT die polishing. Now I know this because every '21 Morgan from that die marriage has those very same lines. Somehow, someway - somebody scratched the living heck out of that die. And the result is that particular VAM. Now to illustrate how absolutely rare it for a die to become scratched up like that, all you have to do is try to find any other VAM like it. There's not a single one. And ya know what ? There aren't any for any other types of coins either. And if you talking about the IHC, and you think all of those lines were on the coin die. Then you try and find me another one. Because if those marks were on the die then there should be plenty more of them out there. Just like there is with that Morgan. But get ready to look for a while, because you aren't going to find any. I don't deny that, I even said so. But most people fail to recognize it. Even worse, they fail to even look for it. Just like with that '93 IHC. Yes, there are some die polish marks on it. They are easily recognized if you look closely. And what happens is that when people see a bunch of lines on a coin like that, and they can see that at least some of them are indeed die polish marks, they then assume that ALL of them are die polish marks. And when you assume, you make mistakes. You see every few people, including many professional graders, understand how die polishing is done. Therefore they do not know that it is impossible for die polish marks to crisscross. If they did, when they saw crisscrossing lines on a coin like that it would raise a red flag. I never claimed that PMD to a coin is not more serious than damage to a die. And yes I agree, PMD would and should impact the grade more in a negative way. But damage to a die is still damage - die scratches are damage. Not much denying that. And as such, even the damage to the die should impact the grade in a negative way. The problem I have is that the TPGs do not do this - they ignore it. In my opinion no coin produced from a damaged die should ever be graded higher than MS64. Think about this for a minute. Any coin that is considered damaged is said to be ungradeable. Even the TPGs agree with this idea. And the very concept of grading is that coins with the fewest marks, the better strikes, the better luster are graded the highest. And by necessity those better coins have to come from better dies. So does it not stand to reason that when you have a damaged die that the damaged die cannot produce higher graded coins ? It sure seems to make sense to me. MS65 and above are Gem grades. So to find a coin that is worthy of that Gem grade you have to find one that came from Gem dies. It's pretty simple really, no damaged die can produce a Gem coin. And even if every one of those lines on that '93 IHC are the result of lines being on the die ( I do not for one second believe they all were, but just suppose), then that die would have to be considered damaged. And therefore incapable of producing a GEM, MS65 coin. Thus the coin is not deserving of the grade. Now if you or anybody else wants to disagree with that idea - be my guest. For when it comes to grades all any of us has is an opinion. But marks on a die, and its resulting coins, those are facts, not opinions. And it is very easy, too easy, to mistake one type of mark on a die, and its resulting coins, for another. Hopefully this discussion will help at least a few people to understand and learn to recognize one from the other so they don't fall into the same trap.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches