If NGC wants us to take them seriously, they need to stop lying.

Very interesting discussion, @Barry Murphy Thanks for the explanations!

As a US collector coming to the ancient realms for the first time, the backup from NGC is welcome to me. I have no preconceptions about an ancient grading scale (although, the US scale is extremely familiar to me).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Naw John, you are good! When you use the IGNORE button on trolls, it ALL goes away! BLISS now!

 

Undoubtedly the slabbed coin has been "worked" before it was placed in the slab. Compare these before and after details in the wing:



I highly doubt that lighting alone would make the fine details in the wing look that much sharper.

 

This is why I've always called NGC's grading system "ridiculous" rather than calling the coins "overgraded." I do think MS is a bit of an exaggeration; even "as struck," which is more typically used by ancients dealers is a bit of an exaggeration. Very few coins remain "mint state" after hundreds or thousands of years of burial.

 

If we define mint state as perfection, relatively few ancients left the mint that way. The differences in strike on US coins between a MS61 and MS69 is relatively little but there are ancients which never had better than Fine Details when they were made. This really makes it hard to force a rating into one of just five strike levels. I still believe that grading ancient coins is a pointless activity because of the need to decide which of several factors counts more and which can be ignored and still allow a coin top marks. We had to grade coins when we were buying from unillustrated lists but in this day of photos being expected for $5 coins, we might be as well off just rating how a coin strikes us compared to its photo than how it compared to an indefinable standard. With any system, who will pay for a coin marked 'less than average' or 'almost worst known'. Business and truth are hard to make play nicely together.

 

On the PCGS registry, the geniuses have created "lowball" sets. You get more points for having the lowest graded coins. Its the most bizarre nonsense I've ever seen.

 

Just a couple of observations...

As far as I can say, obverse doesn't seems to show much ,if any, signs of tooling.

eBay sale photo / Ira & Larry Goldberg Auction 90 Lot 3085 (same obv. die) / Gorny & Mosch photo...



I agree that the reverse looks weird, but if it were tooled to some extent, why would the person who did it leave a somewhat severe cut unaltered ?

 

This is probably the key insight into why grading ancients has decreasing relevance nowadays.

I'm glad I didn't start collecting before digital photos became widespread. Without photos, a collector would have to rely, to some extent, on a grade given to a coin by an expert. For ancients, a grade would have to be accompanied by a written description in order to make it really useful. Even EF-graded ancients can exhibit flaws or just-average style. With a photo, a collector can judge for himself whether the coin really appeals to him. But even then, in-hand evaluation is ultimately required for the highest condition coins.

 

Tooling through the area of that cut, in order to restore the original strike, would have been way, way too obvious to escape even the most cursory examination.

 

WELL SAID, and very politely I might add!

Unfortunately, in my original comment, done in a heated rage I neglected to mention the obvious. I should think that ANY of the "coin guys" in the ancient coin forum would have know that grading done-across-the-pond is different.

 

And your point is that in this instance...? I don't know how long you have been collecting or your skill level but I do know this:

1. "Time in" means absolutely nothing for sure. Many collectors/dealers with decades of "time in" are ignorant! I have read an example of this.

2. The "line" between "no trace pf wear" and a "market acceptable Uncirculated" grade is very slim in most cases. That's why we each should have personal standards. One auction lot will be graded Unc; yet receive an AU grade at a TPGS or from buyers. You have illustrated the reverse.

3. I think we'll all agree that there are hundreds of thousands of cases where a lot is listed conservatively knowing that the coin is a market acceptable Unc! IMO, the coin you posted may have a "shot" at MS-62 (most U.S. 62's are net graded due to cleaning or show signs of slight circulation).

 

I purposely stayed away from this thread due to the heat, but now that things are calming down I may as well give my two cents.

What did you guys expect from the TPG that brought us the "Colosseum Hoard", the "Seven Hills Hoard", the "Golden Age Hoard" and the "Byzantium Hoard". The only thing the coins in these hoards have in common is some coin flipping outfit writing a big check to NGC to get them to invent a new hoard that the con artists could market and scam unsuspecting customers with, making them think these overpriced common (and often badly cleaned, tooled, or damaged) coins that are otherwise not related to each other all came from some ultra-special hoard and worth big money.

If you sell your integrity for a check and invent hoards that never existed, knowing that unsuspecting and uneducated consumers are going to get scammed by the people who wrote you the check because of their trust in NGC as a reputable US coin grading service, then you deserve no respect from me or any other ancients collector. If I did something similar in my line of work, I'd be prosecuted for fraud and my law license would be permanently revoked. Isn't it sad when lawyers have stronger rules of professional conduct than a TPG?

PS: If you take issue with what I wrote, that's fine. It's just my honest opinion, and that's how I feel about them.

 

Flash: Lighting and glass lenses in photography are like stage makeup. A good photographer can "sharpen" the details or blur them out.

 

Prove it.

Take two different pictures of the same coin, changing just the lighting etc., and illustrate how the sharpness can be enhanced to the level shown above.

No post processing with Photoshop or any other software is allowed.

 

The first picture isn't in focus so the comparison is too difficult to be sure when any alleged tooling happened.

I think the coin was probably tooled but there's a chance it was just harshly cleaned and scratches were left in the patina without any removal of actual metal, and this might be accentuated by the lighting.

I've seen coins I was convinced were tooled from photos only to learn they weren't when I saw them in hand.

 

Flash...This is the Coin Business. Your honest opinion is very common among numismatists. I goes like this: Buy a bunch of junk, take out an ad, and tell the suckers the junk - the coins are from "The Vatican Collection' or the "Crete Hoard." Only thing different today is we have TV and TPGS's.

 

It's kinda funny, eh? => Insider makes everybody else seem kinda likeable



... just jokes, dude ... I'm sure that you are trying to be cool, smart, or something

=> coin-on, brother!! (don't stop trying to sell your schtick!!)

"Please-please-please" post some of your sweet ancient examples ... I'm sure you'll be able to bring-home your point with a handful of graceful examples

 

Prove it? That's like asking me to prove I'm using a computer keyboard. IMO, ancient coin collectors are just a little smarter than the average coinhead; that appears to be one more misconception on my part!

I'm just an educated and reasonably informed "Coin Guy" not a professional photographer. Aren't you a long-time, well-known member here? Are you forgetting all the posts on the ancient coin forum showing the identical coin photographed in different auctions/websites. That should be proof enough for anyone with two working eyes and an open mind.

 

In reply to your second point: For better or worse, slabbing has indeed made some inroads into the ancient coin marketplace, at least in the US, but I absolutely guarantee you that these quantum-level grade distinctions have not. This minutia is not what determines the quality of an ancient coin and by and large the market faithfully reflects that. For the most part this discussion simply isn't germane to ancient coins, at least not among even moderately experienced collectors. I suppose this stuff may matter to greenhorns just off the USS Mercury Dime.

 

I have a thick skin, enjoy the back-and-forth, enjoy being educated, and I EXPECT to be questioned.

The few "good" ancients I have + one byzantine AV nomisma are all AU+ to Unc. They were purchased in the 1980's. I keep them housed in a little black case w/red velvet sections that has given my Uncirculated Rhodian drachm a beautiful iridescent blue toning. The coins are in the bank. I confess to not touching my ancients for over a decade as I get to play with coins all day that belong to other people. One day I will need to back up my contention with some photos as anyone can write anything here, even a .