Updated scoring of Roosevelt Dime Mint State sets

[Lablover]

Nick,

 

Thank you for the effort and time you've invested in the updated scoring, and the attempt to create a scale better suited to the Roosevelt Registry. It's obvious your years of putting together top flight sets along with the vast experience you have has paid dividends.

 

I've posted very little regarding the change NGC set forth just a short time ago. Other than myself and Rainbowroosie no one has much reason to complain. The two of us took the hits with the change, I the most. The issues I have are not for this board and will be addressed directly with NGC. Thus, I will not share certain feelings in public. But, I can tell you the financial hit I took was severe. And, I'm not a happy camper.

 

However, I do support the changes you've proposed. I suppose it's in the best interest of all concerned, although my set will still take the brunt of the change.

 

In regards to a few of Pauls comments: I only found two dates where the MS67* had more points than the MS67FT. Pauls scale tends to assume all dates are equal (on average) and therefore assigns points somewhat equally across the board. Most of us know this is not the case. Key dates, populations come to mind.

 

I will contine to believe in many instances the MS67* (most all "star" coins for that matter) can be a tougher coin to find than it's MS67FT brother. I've spent years searching for "star" worthy coins and I believe my set is second to none, and it shows. Those coins which are truely worthy of the star are hard to find. However, I've come across many MS67FT coins that were, simply put...widgets!!! Offen the bands are not separated enough to be so designated, but there it is...in a FT holder.

 

All of us choose to build sets for various reasons. Some, like me, choose to focus on high grade coins with superior eye appeal, i.e. "star" coins. Others focus on the FT. I think it's great either way.

 

However, let's be clear...the FT has nothing to do with the "strike" of the coin as some believe. If that was the case than all MS68's (and to a lesser degree MS67's too) would be FT. The MS68 grade for example should have a "full strike". The FT has more to do with the way the die was cut and not the strike of the coin. I'm not saying FT's don't deserve additional points. But, it's not the end-all grade for point consideration. To many other factors are in play. There are dates where the FT should gain more points than the MS68, and I believe Nick has taken that into consideration.

 

That's why it's great to have somone like yourself Nick that's spent years with the Roosevelt series providing objective input.

 

Thanks again for the efforts,

 

Jim

[Simple Collector]

Many are making very good points on here and I believe all have their merits. In my opinion, there can be two different collecting philosophies when collecting this series. As Jim points out, some coins designated as FT, in all honesty, should not be given the FT designation. I have also seen some * designated coins that do not deserve the * either. I have also seen coins that should be given the FT or the * designation and NGC has obviously disagreed.

 

The biggest issue I see in this is the inability to make everyone happy. Reality is, it just will not happen. I am on the fence as to the impact either positive or negative, assigned point values will have on any given coin. Coins designated as FT - * or FT*, regardless of grade, will command a premium in the market over coins not designated as such.

 

I would still like to see NGC add an additional basic set that doesn't put the premium on the FT coins, but rather grade with a premium value on coins designated with the coveted * designation.

 

Lonnie

 

[Lablover]

I have also seen some * designated coins that do not deserve the * either. I have also seen coins that should be given the FT or the * designation and NGC has obviously disagreed.

 

Agreed. It's just that I tend to regard "eye-appeal" as a very important part of the coin. As important, or more important than the technical grade. I believe the "star" helps define the "PQ" (Premium Quality) of the coin. I think this is what NGC was attempting to do when they increased the points for "star" coins a few years ago.

 

Both designations (Star and FT) have nothing to do with the coins "strike" and/or technical grade. They are what they are: designations. Both can be equally difficult to locate. The MS67* and MS67FT are still MS67 coins within the technical grade. Frankly, I'll take a MS67* over the MS67FT most of the time. The MS67FT has a more defined cut (separation) in the lower band. However, the MS67* will have the all important "eye-appeal".

[dennis edwards]

Just a small quibble, Jim. It's not accurate to say FT has nothing to do with strike. Full, separated bands can be prevented by:

 

- The way the die was struck (like you said);

 

- The die state;

 

- Anything else that affects strike generally (e.g., strike pressure, die or planchet movement, alloy variations, etc.).

 

So any number of things can prevent full torch, bands, whatever, but only all of them going right can make them. In other words, yes, you can have a full strike without a full torch and full, separated bands, but it's very unlikely to have a full torch and bands without having a full strike. In other words, the FT (or FB) designation is if anything a tougher measure than merely a full strike, and the relative scarcity of the coins that deservingly get the designation shows that.

[erwindoc]

I love the discussion! Since getting into the Roosevelt arena more seriously, I have always debated having the higher grade versus the "star" versus the FT designation. I must say that I continue to go back and forth with the issue. My sets can attest to that. Some of it depends on what I can afford at the time and what is available. However, I think most would agree with me that the way a coin looks is more important that what is on the holder. I can attest that I have seen some ugly 67FT coins and some less than appealing 68's. The stars have been more uniform in their appeal and the ones I have are outstanding in their eye appeal, but they are sure difficult to find. It will be interesting to see what happens in the series.

[Lablover]

I love the discussion!

 

Me too!

 

It's great to be able to agree to disagree. Each of us love our Roosies, and bring something important to the table. I continue to learn something new each day from my fellow collectors with different insight.

 

I'm thankfull for that

[dennis edwards]

erwindoc,

 

just realized who u are. your (ft, not *) coins are on the way!

[erwindoc]

[RareSov]

Great discussion, wish I knew anything about the coins !

 

It is a good point that the * ones should always gather good points. You will never see an ugly * coin..

[Guest Joiseygirl]

We have received several suggestions along with this post for changes to the recent score update for the Roosevelt Dimes. We plan to implement a reevaluation sometime next week and wanted to allow any other final comments.

 

Thank you.

 

Amy T. Lorenzo

'Joiseygirl'

[Wondercoin]

Hi Amy & all of the Roosie folks: I certainly have "no horse in this race". I sold off Justhavingfun's fantastic Silver Roosie Dime set back at FUN 09, where the sold coins fetched over "six figures" that night- a single auction record for silver Roosies. For those who may not know, JHF's collection consisted of my original #1 1999 Silver Roosie Registry set at PCGS (before there was even an online registry at PCGS or NGC and only a paperback version of the PCGS registry was distributed yearly), Steve Heller's former #1 silver dime set, OnlyRoosies (Nick) former #1 silver dime set and some wonderful additions from the Craig Harries' set and others. The JHF silver dime set was a masterpiece and it was a pleasure working with JHF in building that set over the years. I know that many of the JHF dimes will find their way into the very top registry sets for many, many years to come (inlcuding some wonderful NGC examples).

 

For the better part of the last decade, I have had the great pleasure of working with Nick (onlyroosies) in the area of silver dimes. THERE IS SIMPLY NO ONE OUT THERE THAT UNDERSTANDS THE INTRICACY OF THE SILVER ROOSIE DIME SERIES (FB, STAR, PL, TRUE CONDITION RARITY, ETC.) BETTER THAN NICK. Tonight, I spent some time examining Nick's proposed dime chart. What a massive amount of fine work went into that chart! I hope NGC consults with Nick on all of his work, date by date, before finalizing any of their numbers as they could get no better feedback on silver dimes today than from Nick. NGC's grade by grade weighting of the silver dime dates is, IMHO, "state of the art registry" weighting and I hope NGC continues to provide "world class" silver dime weighting moving forward as this is a very special coin series to me. Keep up the great work Nick!! Wondercoin

[Simple Collector]

Well put by Wondercoin!

 

I have also reviewed Nick's spreadsheet date/mm by date/mm and agree with the anaylsis that Nick has provided.

 

I hope the good people at NGC will give Nick's spreadsheet careful attention and consider changing the point values for the series in accordance with these recommendations!

 

Thanks - Lonnie

[Lablover]

For the better part of the last decade, I have had the great pleasure of working with Nick (onlyroosies) in the area of silver dimes. THERE IS SIMPLY NO ONE OUT THERE THAT UNDERSTANDS THE INTRICACY OF THE SILVER ROOSIE DIME SERIES (FB, STAR, PL, TRUE CONDITION RARITY, ETC.) BETTER THAN NICK. Tonight, I spent some time examining Nick's proposed dime chart. What a massive amount of fine work went into that chart! I hope NGC consults with Nick on all of his work, date by date, before finalizing any of their numbers as they could get no better feedback on silver dimes today than from Nick. NGC's grade by grade weighting of the silver dime dates is, IMHO, "state of the art registry" weighting and I hope NGC continues to provide "world class" silver dime weighting moving forward as this is a very special coin series to me. Keep up the great work Nick!! Wondercoin

 

Very well said Mitch, and I would agree 100%.

 

I too support the recommended changes Nick has proposed!!!

[erwindoc]

This has been such an exciting couple of weeks. I cant wait to see what happens next with the Roosevelt series. Thanks Nick for all the effort with the updates. I hope that NGC takes some of your recommendations for scoring updates.

 

By the way, I think NGC hit a homerun with the clad scoring! Getting full torch in those things is very tough. I wouldnt change a thing there, but my opinion is just a little biased!!!

[bsandersen-migration]

I agree with the FT coins getting max points but I don't think the margin between a FT and a Star graded coin should be that much. When you look a FT coin you are looking at quality and strike. When you consider a Star graded coin my personal opinion is that these coins are extremely difficult to come by and is all dependent on storage and many other factors.

 

A few of you have mentioned that 68's should receive a considerable markup in points. It seems to me there should be a significant difference between a 66 and 67 as well. You can find 66's all day long while 67's are more of a challenge and 68's are like gold (maybe better).

 

Lastly, Stars from the early 1960's are extremely difficult to come by (just look at the census) and I feel the point scale for these dates should be adjusted a bit to show this. As you all know mint sets were put in plastic starting in 1959, hence the reason these roosies are more difficult to come by.

[erwindoc]

I agree about the early 60's stars being more difficult and the need for more reflection in scoring. Good point about the mint packaging!

[Guest Joiseygirl]

We submitted the reevaluation of the recent update to Roosevelt Dimes scores today. Please feel free to comment on these changes.

 

Thank you,

 

Amy T. Lorenzo

'Joiseygirl'

[Paul Kiraly 3]

It is a little better. Now my 49-d ms68 is 15 points more than my 67*ft..I was hoping for 200 points more...Some years a ms67*ft is more points than a 68.Those need a little more tweaking.Defently the 1955-P need to be corrected A ms68* is worth less points than a ms67*ft..Who was drinking,when they put out those numbers.

[onlyroosies]

The bulk of the changes came from my spread sheet for the basic grades. i,e, MS67, MS67FT, MS68 and MS68FT. NGC has their own formula for determining star points somewhere in-between the grade given and next grade up. NGC did make a few adjustments to what I had here and there. I like it and I don't see any further need of tweaking at this time. Good job NGC responding to everyone's concerns.

 

Nick Cascio

[walt666-migration]

I like it. I lost 1328 points in my 1955 Mint Set with this change, but truly believe this update is better/more fair.

Walt Ughes

[rons]

I am very impressed with the way that NGC listened to input from the collectors and made adjustments to their scores. Bravo to NGC and kudos to the folks who did the leg work to make the changes possible. Thank you for sharing the knowledge and insights you have gained in your studies of this series. Awesome!!!

[Revenant]

It is a little better. Now my 49-d ms68 is 15 points more than my 67*ft..I was hoping for 200 points more...Some years a ms67*ft is more points than a 68.Those need a little more tweaking.Defently the 1955-P need to be corrected A ms68* is worth less points than a ms67*ft..Who was drinking,when they put out those numbers.

 

I can never figure out why someone has to be drunk or stupid in order to disagree with you. Have you ever considered a more constructive way to support your position?

[Lablover]

Thanks NGC!!!

 

I'm happy to see most of Nick's suggestions were taken to heart. For all involved I believe the most recent changes bring a bit of fairness to the Registry. Although I've still lost tons of points compared to the system prior to the changes, I think the change makes sense.

 

Hopefully, all will agree.

 

Thanks again NGC for listening!

 

Jim

[Paul Kiraly 3]

I think the new scores are better than before. Roosevelts dimes are my favorite to collect. I do have a huge collection of coins,and so far,not even my gold or my platinum coins affect me like my roosevelts. I am very opinonated when when it comes to my roosevelts. Even when the new scores came out and I gained a tremendous amount of points,and I complained it wasn't fair. Now many people told me,I shouldnt complain because of the great amount of points I got. I was the only one standing to lose the most amount of points,and keep lablover in #1.I was never about the points.Even since I started my roosevelt collection in 2007,I never owned a ms67*,because it had more points than a ms67ft. Strike Quality is what drove me. I will keep looking for full torches than star quality coins when I go to shows.Dont get me wrong ,I like toned roosevelts and I own a lot of them,but they all are full torches. Lablover you do have a nice toned collection,that a lot of people would like to have. My Collection is 90% high grade strike quality,that is also liked by a lot of people. We will probally never agree on a lot of issues. We do have have the best 2 silver roosevelt's in the ngc world. Amy thanks for re-evaluating the roosevelt set.The set points will never be perfect,but over time,the points may eventually fan out great.I hope one day a new comer,will beat Lablover and I in roosevelts. It is not an impossible challenge,it will take plenty of roosevelt dime searching with a lot of luck.Take care everyone at NGC and in the roosevelt collection