Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 8017080, member: 112&quot;]I&#039;ll be the first to agree with you that older coins are given a good bit of leniency by the TPGs when it comes to grading them. Particularly when it comes to things that would make them a problem coin. But me, I don&#039;t do that - ever ! </p><p><br /></p><p>As an example, a more modern coin and an older coin can have the exact same issues. And the TPGs would pretty much always designate the more modern coin as a problem coin, but they would give the older coin a clean grade. That&#039;s the kind of leniency I&#039;m talking about. But me, I would designate both coins as problem coins. </p><p><br /></p><p>Regarding the dipping issue when it comes to well worn coins. The statement I originally made is pretty simple and straightforward and it means exactly what I said. When someone uses the term &quot;over-dipped&quot;, in all cases they are talking about a coin that has had all of its luster removed by the coin dip. But if a coin has no luster on it to begin with, by definition that can&#039;t happen. Which means a coin with a lot of wear on it and no luster whatsoever cannot be over-dipped. There would be one exception, and that is what is mentioned by cplradar in his comments below, (underlined by me) - but I have never seen nor even heard of an example of it.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Yes, if a well worn coin were left in coin dip long enough, and it would have to be a considerable period of time, to eat away the surface of the coin, remove detail and possibly leave it pitted, then yes it could be possible. But that&#039;s about the only way I can even think of. But as I said I have never seen nor even heard of such a thing actually being done. Nor have I ever seen or even heard of the TPGs designating a well worn coin as having been over-dipped. It simply doesn&#039;t happen. </p><p><br /></p><p>As for your comment dipping being the reason for the light scratches and hairlines becoming visible - yes, that happens all the time ! That is one of the risks that one always faces when dipping a coin. The very purpose of dipping a coin is to remove toning and or contaminants from the coin. Both of which can easily cover up and completely hide light scratches, hairlines, and in some cases even evidence of a previous and old harsh/improper cleaning on a coin. And if it has been harshly/improperly cleaned, then that coin is designated as a problem coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>But what one needs to understand is that it is not the dipping that makes the coin a problem coin, it is the previous damage that nobody could see prior to the dipping that makes it a problem coin. The dipping itself did not do any damage to the coin ! It merely allowed pre-existing damage to become visible.</p><p><br /></p><p>All of this is why dipping coins has always, and when I says always I mean for as long as dipping has existed which happens to be for the last 200 years or so, as being a perfectly acceptable practice by the numismatic community. <u>When a coin is dipped properly,</u> no damage to the coin can be done by the coin dip ! The vast majority of the time when a coin is dipped properly it is considered by the numismatic community to be a good thing, and sometimes a very, very good thing ! Often increasing its value, and sometimes increasing its value several times over ! I have seen examples of coins where before it was dipped it was worth $26,000 - but after it was dipped it was worth $156,000 ![/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