Struck Counterfeit 1798 "Large Cent"

Not to beat this into the ground, but I am one of the "EAC folks"...

Jack D. Young EAC 5050

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks Conder101; the LSCC definitely made the discovery on the 1872-s. I stumbled onto one due to reviewing coin listings from several connected sellers of other fakes and actually contacted the club with images of one while they were finalizing their discovery. I wrote the following article (with their edits from their knowledge) for Coin Week and they also published a version in their Gobrecht Journal (I joined their club as a result of their help understanding this one): https://coinweek.com/counterfeits/c...-1872-s-half-dollar-1-page-attribution-guide/

Unfortunately to your point, just sharing the info with the TPG's does not necessarily mean they won't miss another one... Time is required to flush these out when submitted.

 

Jack D. Young, posted: "Not to beat this into the ground, but I am one of the "EAC folks"... Jack D. Young EAC 5050"

I thought every one reading the thread knew that: By Jack D. Young, Early American Coppers (EAC) ……

Anyway, thanks for posting your EAC membership number. I'll bet no one here knew that. EAC is a great organization. I was a member for a year but the research you all do in your publication was way above my intelligence level or needs.

I'll be sure to include you and Dennis when I write about the "Folly" of EAC Net Grading again!

 

1803 C-3, 1805 C-4, 1806 C-1.

 

Thanks from all of us I'm sure.

Any record of a 1798/7 Cent or 1833 1/2 Cent? Will you be at the Summer FUN Show?

 

Michael, we have suspicions about S-152; nothing for the 1833 1/2 cent. Planning on the Aug ANA but not FUN.

 

.

 

I looked up the other thread you were posting on but have not read it yet.

Thankfully, the TPGS are imaging stuff to help spot fakes. Still, it is the eye of the
examiner that gives the first "gut" reaction and IMO, you copper specialists are way ahead of the authenticators right now as you spend more time and have seen more copper!

Eventually, all coins should be imaged so the computer can take over the job of authentication.

 

Just a note (a humble opinion) about the ones that have been holdered by TPG’s- the fact that these got by both knowledgeable Third Party Graders and experienced dealers/ collectors is not viewed as a poor reflection on them, but as a wake-up call to the latest level of counterfeits to enter the Hobby. My view is that all have tightened up in their diligence and the number of these “coins” actually making it into slabs has decreased exponentially since we became aware of these in late 2015. And, the TPG’s guarantees of authenticity continue to protect the owner of one if it is indeed determined to be counterfeit. The next hurdle may well be the on-line selling venues…

 

I don't have slabbed coins, slabbing destroyed the collectible sports card hobby,
and I don't see much use for it except for the very rarest most valuable coins which require authentication, protection and documentation.
Some of the graders have only 10 seconds to look at a coin. You may just be exposing overworked graders more than anything really significant.
They don't have the luxury of studying a coin for hours, with enlargements and microscopes after the fact, to look for markers like some other hobbyists do.

 

In my limited experience, in the 1970's when using a stereomicroscope, it usually took less than 4 seconds to detect 99% of the counterfeit or altered coins. Over the decades, that time has creeped up. Detection of all but the most dangerous counterfeits is still done very quickly.

That said, in some coin series (Example: Trade Dollars) what formerly took about 6 seconds before the deceptive counterfeits in the 1990's (?) were discovered has now risen to over a minute on many coins!

Graders at NGC or PCGS do not have the need or luxury of studying a coin for hours!

As to keeping TPGS "mistakes" in the slabs for education and display ...I can guarantee that it has caused bad blood - mostly to the detriment of "outside" specialists.

 

just to play devil's advocate, shouldn't the TPGs do whatever it takes and commit the resources necessary to do the job for which they are charging? i.e. - authenticating and certifiying?

Isn't it incumbent upon them to take more time, if that's what's necessary?

 

They do take more time when needed. There’s not a shot clock on them for how fast they have to work. The whole 10 second thing is an average someone figured out from the number of coins graded in a day with man hours ect. Most coins are really quick and those numbers include modern ASE and commem grading ect. For whatever reason people have taken that to think they have to be done in seconds with every coin no matter what.

 

I was addressing insider's claim that they don't have time. He called it a luxury.

If it's a luxury to take enough time to do the job correctly, that's the definition of necessity, not luxury.

 

mikenoodle, posted: "just to play devil's advocate, shouldn't the TPGs do whatever it takes and commit the resources necessary to do the job for which they are charging? i.e. - authenticating and certifiying? Isn't it incumbent upon them to take more time, if that's what's necessary?"

Come on Mike. Read the post. The guys working at the major TPGS for over twenty years are so far... Therefore, "necessary" is a moving target for us and them.

Next. All coins are authenticated in a timely manner. Often this takes only two seconds! If more time is needed or if it needs to be sent out to a consultant, that is done.

AFAIK, the only thing different from the 1970's when some coins were held several months for study is that today's authenticators must decide right away or in a few days (turnaround time from consultant).

Additionally, Most major TPGS have diagnostic files that can be accessed on a grader's (at least the finalizers) computer. Much of the "research' is already done and published. In the 1970's, I needed to make photographs and hand drawings, get film developed and filed, etc. You guys have more stuff at your fingertips on the Internet than I could ever have imagined. We held coins at ANACS for a few weeks to get a batch ready (6-12) to take to the Smithsonian looking for comparison specimens.

 

I was only looking to clarify. You have TPG experience, I do not

 

You worked at ANACS? And now ICG? Does ICG have the "stereomicroscope" you keep referring to?

Also, do you really feel that non-seasoned copper collectors are actually "these idiots you mention" as you previously stated? Wow, talk about "self serving"...

 

Jack D. Young, posted: "You worked at ANACS? And now ICG? Does ICG have the "stereomicroscope" you keep referring to?"

Yes, Jack. When I was about 6 or 7, my grandfather gave me an antique French brass microscope and a collection of slides. I still have it. Since then, I've used a microscope to look at things in Biology classes in high school and Biology, Mineralogy, and Genetic classes in college. Funny thing, I never looked at a coin with one until joining ANACS. The Mint authenticators used them and they trained my boss how to authenticate coins. Since then (almost 50 years), I've used a stereo microscope every where I've worked including NGC and NCS. BTW, I think one reason the second tier TPGS are so strict is they use stereomicroscopes to examine coins.

I RARELY grade or authenticate ANY coin without looking at it with my eyes first. The scope and florescent light (4.5X and two eyes unless more magnification needed) second and finally a 7X hand lens. You see Jack, I wish to see everything possible to see on a coin in order to make an informed opinion. Then I want to see what 98% of the other people can see with just their hand lens. Additionally, after seeing the characteristics on coins under high magnification a student is able to ID them with a low power hand lens. I puke when I see well-known, knowledgeable, professionals discussing something on a coin for several minutes when it should have only taken a few seconds if they had been trained with a scope.

Also, do you really feel that non-seasoned copper collectors are actually "these idiots you mention" as you previously stated? Wow, talk about "self serving"

Nice try Jack. The idiots are the folks who don't believe a TPGS can make an honest mistake. The idiots are those who you show a very deceptive RAW fake yet they don't believe you and think you are lying that it was ever in a slab.

IMHO, the only "Self-Serving" going on is being done by those "experts" showing counterfeits in TPGS slabs and claiming they are doing it to show how dangerous the fakes are. I was born at night but not last night!

PS You should get an expensive stereomicroscope to study the big cents (if you don't have one). It will open up a whole new world of numismatics to you and make coin attributions much quicker.

PS I'll look forward to meeting you at a show one day and picking your brain.

 

Obviously F. we agree on some things and not so much on others; I feel you look at things through TPG colored glasses, but that is what it is.

If you had stayed EAC we would probably meet in Michigan in May, although the conventions are certainly open to all; otherwise maybe ANA Philly this August?

Looking forward to a face-to-face.

Best, Jack.

 

Deal. ANA Philly this August.

As for TPG glasses. My grading standards are much more strict. I like to tell students that I personally helped put two places out of business by being such a tight grader.