Excellent example of false grading 1 1

[RWB]

This proof half dollar was posted on another site with the claim that it was "PF-63." The owner questioned why the independently stated "grade" was not higher.

Take a close look and post your thoughts on the real grade of this coin - and why.

Edited September 16, 2021 by RWB
corrected error

[GBrad]

My comment has been retracted for sheer ignorance on my part!!!  I just learned something new about silver coin DENOMINATIONS.... I will leave it at that.....LOL. I will stick to my Lincoln's for now.

Edited September 16, 2021 by GBrad
Dumb mistake on my part :)

[Coinbuf]

I would call it AU from what looks like very light cabinet friction/rub (most notably on the forward leg and a couple of the skirt lines) and the hairlines in the fields, however grading proofs from photos is difficult at best.   You have to be able to see in hand proof coins like this to see if what looks like rub may be only strike weakness or hairlines that may not be from cleaning.   

Edited September 16, 2021 by Coinbuf

[TPRC]

Well, it does look like a proof but it is an impaired proof based upon the light hair lining on the right field, on the breast and on the leg. Having said that, I feel like I've seen worse in 61 or 62 holders. But I'll go Proof 58.

[GBrad]

Ok, I am going to try to redeem myself here from my last comment which I humbly redacted.  I believe I have a (maybe not though....) better opinion of this HALF.  Should this have graded details?  I see one area on this coin that raised a red flag to my eye.  If I'm correct, which I don't anticipate, whoever did it did one heck of a good job repairing it.....? 

Edited September 16, 2021 by GBrad

[MarkFeld]

Talk about "false" - the poster did not claim that the coin (which is in a PR63 holder) was a 64.

His thread title is: "Inexperienced at grading, what prevented this seated half from pr64?" And his opening post reads:

"I'm not experienced at all with coin grading but id like to learn more. I understand the basic principles but the tough part for me is understanding how grading differs from series to series. I picked up this proof seated half recently and it looks to be pretty lustrous for 160 year old silver, perhaps it was even dipped at one time? The strike looks decent and the fields are clean, with extra lighting there's like one little scratch to the right of her knee. It looks as good if not better than some ms64 coins I have but i don't have a lot of proof coins. any insight or knowledge is much appreciated."

Link to thread: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1063514/inexperienced-at-grading-what-prevented-this-seated-half-from-pr64#latest

In addition to the above, it's all but impossible to assess most Proof coins accurately, based upon images. 

Edited September 16, 2021 by MarkFeld

[Alex in PA.]

[RWB]

On 9/16/2021 at 2:21 PM, MarkFeld said:

In addition to the above, it's all but impossible to assess most Proof coins accurately, based upon images. 

Not on this one.

The type was corrected, but the question remains valid.

[JT2]

Did anyone comment on the big thumb print on it?  i would drop it to PF58.... with that being siad i am thiking a few ticks over graded.  also what are all of the hair lines to the right of liberty?

[GBrad]

There looks to be circ. wear on her knee, ball of the foot and her wrist, maybe?  If this actually is wear, and not just rub marks from other coins, how could it even have achieved a score of 60 or higher?  I'm basing this off of my plethora of grading knowledge (not!).  Just politely wondering.....How long is this question going to go on without telling us, or informing us on, what the 'real grade' is? I stand down

Edited September 16, 2021 by GBrad

[MarkFeld]

On 9/16/2021 at 3:13 PM, JT2 said:

Did anyone comment on the big thumb print on it?  i would drop it to PF58.... with that being siad i am thiking a few ticks over graded.  also what are all of the hair lines to the right of liberty?

Someone did comment about the print. However, whether you agree or not, mint state and Proof coins aren’t downgraded to AU due to prints. And most classic Proof coins exhibit some degree of hairlines. In fact, in a great many cases, the extent of hairlines largely determines the grade.

[MarkFeld]

On 9/16/2021 at 3:07 PM, RWB said:

Not on this one.

The type was corrected, but the question remains valid.

Then you have capabilities that mere mortals don’t.

[Numismatic, A.A.S.]

On 9/16/2021 at 4:57 PM, MarkFeld said:

And most classic Proof coins exhibit some degree of hairlines. In fact, in a great many cases, the extent of hairlines largely determines the grade.

I have experienced this over the years and remember a costly lesson on hairlines...thanks Mark.

[Numismatic, A.A.S.]

On 9/16/2021 at 11:58 AM, RWB said:

This proof half dollar was posted on another site with the claim that it was "PF-63." The owner questioned why the independently stated "grade" was not higher.

Take a close look and post your thoughts on the real grade of this coin - and why.

Are there discernible striations (as made) I think I see them in the field? Common on business strikes from Civil War Era but on a Proof I'm not sure.  

[Woods020]

While this isn’t the nicest proof seated half I’ve seen, I guess I am the dissenting minority. I see no definitive signs of wear. In hand that may be different but from the pictures alone I say uncirculated. This are extremely difficult to pick up AU I admit, but I just pulled out the ANA grading standards and QDBs guide book and I agree with the 63. I say it borders cameo but I see why it wasn’t given it. 
 

Now you may argue it has a lot of hairlines and potentially cleaned. I can’t say it definitively hasn’t. Attached is an excerpt that may be of interest from QDB in his guide book regarding these proofs… I just don’t think there is evidence in that one obverse picture to throw rocks at the graders. 

Edited September 17, 2021 by Woods020

[Woods020]

I meant to add in my previous post and just realized I didn’t….grading standards obviously differ from series to series and time period to time period. Look at pre 1800s US coins and an MS63 looks like a kindergarten art project hacked out of a planchet with a rusted old nail. I think some respondents are trying to apply standards for a modern proof to a seated Liberty coin. I do agree wear may or may not be present though. Impossible to say without looking in hand with a loupe. 

[Conder101]

Fields apper hazed, there is something going on in the field to the right and below the arm, I'd like to look at it in hand through a loupe but it kind of looks like some of the lines in the stars have been strengthened.  The area below liberty's chin is odd, reminds me of attempts to do artificial frosting.

[Woods020]

On 9/16/2021 at 10:21 PM, Conder101 said:

Fields apper hazed, there is something going on in the field to the right and below the arm, I'd like to look at it in hand through a loupe but it kind of looks like some of the lines in the stars have been strengthened.  The area below liberty's chin is odd, reminds me of attempts to do artificial frosting.

I agree. I was thinking I wonder what this thing would look like with an acetone bath. Maybe some of the haze would come off. I think the haze is hiding a fairly nice coin. 

[RWB]

The coin in question has wear on the leg and breast. It does not matter how this happened, and the old con line of "cabinet friction" is nothing but an attempt to misdirect buyer attention. Since proof coins are never bagged, contact with other coins in a bag cannot not be used as an excuse.

Thus the coin can never be higher that "58" or in this case PF-58, exactly as TPRC and others stated. The grade assigned by a third party of PF-63 is clearly - obviously- false. The result is that the present owner has been potentially cheated by paying for a grossly overgraded coin. This is not a matter of quibbling over a point or two - the assigned grade is false and this kind of basic error should never get out of a professional company.

Dealers and collectors must demand that TPG produce consistent, accurate results. However, the lure of easy money seems to activate the greed button in some, making the original submitter a handsome profit for an obviously overgraded coin. It's especially sad that the present owner seems to think his AU-58 proof should actually be graded higher....

Please folks, learn to grade your coins and act first in your own interest when buying. Do Not depend on the label.

[numisport]

TPG's I demand you stop giving MS grades to older coins unless they truly are friction free. Whether MS or Proof you have hundreds and maybe thousands of overgraded coins with rub or 'cabinet friction'. This has been going on since the advent of third party grading. What say you CAC ?

Edited September 17, 2021 by numisport

[MarkFeld]

On 9/17/2021 at 10:39 AM, RWB said:

The coin in question has wear on the leg and breast. It does not matter how this happened, and the old con line of "cabinet friction" is nothing but an attempt to misdirect buyer attention. Since proof coins are never bagged, contact with other coins in a bag cannot not be used as an excuse.

Thus the coin can never be higher that "58" or in this case PF-58, exactly as TPRC and others stated. The grade assigned by a third party of PF-63 is clearly - obviously- false. The result is that the present owner has been potentially cheated by paying for a grossly overgraded coin. This is not a matter of quibbling over a point or two - the assigned grade is false and this kind of basic error should never get out of a professional company.

Dealers and collectors must demand that TPG produce consistent, accurate results. However, the lure of easy money seems to activate the greed button in some, making the original submitter a handsome profit for an obviously overgraded coin. It's especially sad that the present owner seems to think his AU-58 proof should actually be graded higher....

Please folks, learn to grade your coins and act first in your own interest when buying. Do Not depend on the label.

You’re making conclusions and stating opinions as facts, based on on-line images. You should know enough to realize that doing so can be irresponsible. And that’s so matter how certain you are.

[RWB]

On 9/17/2021 at 12:33 PM, MarkFeld said:

You’re making conclusions and stating opinions as facts, based on on-line images. You should know enough to realize that doing so can be irresponsible. And that’s so matter how certain you are.

False. The photos are absolutely clear. All "grades" are opinions. You should know enough to realize that your comments are supportive of lies and misrepresentation and therefore irresponsible. Or is your guiding principle merely greed instead of truth? You, as a prominent member of the commercial numismatic community should be encouraging honesty and accuracy in TPS "grading" opinions, not disparaging the whistleblowers.

Edited September 17, 2021 by RWB

[MarkFeld]

On 9/17/2021 at 11:40 AM, RWB said:

False. The photos are absolutely clear. All "grades" are opinions. You should know enough to realize that your comments are supportive of lies and misrepresentation and therefore irresponsible. Or is your guiding principle merely greed instead of truth? You, as a prominent member of the commercial numismatic community should be encouraging honesty and accuracy in TPS "grading" opinions, not disparaging the whistleblowers.

I strongly encourage honesty and accuracy and often speak out against over-grading and inconsistency in grading. Many collectors and dealers who know me are well aware of that fact. At the same time, I’ve seen countless coins that looked considerably different - many of them, shockingly so - and/or better or worse in hand, than in their images. If you, yourself, haven’t experienced the same on thousands of occasions and aren’t already aware of such disparities, you should look at a lot more coins. 

You’ve unfairly intimidated, if not accused me of bias, on more than one occasion. If you want to see true bias, just look in the mirror.

Edited September 17, 2021 by MarkFeld

[Woods020]

On 9/17/2021 at 10:39 AM, RWB said:

The coin in question has wear on the leg and breast. It does not matter how this happened, and the old con line of "cabinet friction" is nothing but an attempt to misdirect buyer attention. Since proof coins are never bagged, contact with other coins in a bag cannot not be used as an excuse.

Thus the coin can never be higher that "58" or in this case PF-58, exactly as TPRC and others stated. The grade assigned by a third party of PF-63 is clearly - obviously- false. The result is that the present owner has been potentially cheated by paying for a grossly overgraded coin. This is not a matter of quibbling over a point or two - the assigned grade is false and this kind of basic error should never get out of a professional company.

Dealers and collectors must demand that TPG produce consistent, accurate results. However, the lure of easy money seems to activate the greed button in some, making the original submitter a handsome profit for an obviously overgraded coin. It's especially sad that the present owner seems to think his AU-58 proof should actually be graded higher....

Please folks, learn to grade your coins and act first in your own interest when buying. Do Not depend on the label.

Did you take the time to look at all of the photos of the coin from differing angles? Can you say you see wear in the other photos/angles of this coin? Or are you using the one picture, with what is just as likely shadows as wear, to accuse professionals (3) who do this every day of making a glaring mistake? Yes it happens but if you think this is the smoking gun I think you are mistaken. Reverse high points also show no wear. 

[gmarguli]

On 9/17/2021 at 9:12 AM, numisport said:

TPG's I demand you stop giving MS grades to older coins unless they truly are friction free. Whether MS or Proof you have hundreds and maybe thousands of overgraded coins with rub or 'cabinet friction'. This has been going on since the advent of third party grading. What say you CAC ?

Coins can still be uncirculated with cabinet friction. Just like coins can be uncirculated while having been in circulation. 

And while we're demanding things of the TPGs that will never happen:

• TPG's I demand you stop listing provenance of meaningless collectors. No one knows who 99% of these people are. I'm tired of wasting money to remove the provenance from inserts. 
• TPG's I demand you stop using special picture inserts for seemingly every different coin. I get that the Schlock  At Home people want it, but it degrades your image and credibility badly. 

[MarkFeld]

On 9/17/2021 at 2:11 PM, gmarguli said:

Coins can still be uncirculated with cabinet friction. Just like coins can be uncirculated while having been in circulation. 

And while we're demanding things of the TPGs that will never happen:

• TPG's I demand you stop listing provenance of meaningless collectors. No one knows who 99% of these people are. I'm tired of wasting money to remove the provenance from inserts. 
• TPG's I demand you stop using special picture inserts for seemingly every different coin. I get that the Schlock  At Home people want it, but it degrades your image and credibility badly. 

Greg, do you have the provenance removed just for coins you’re keeping for your collection or for the ones you’re reselling too? I can understand you not liking them, but paying to have them removed sounds a bit extreme. Do they really bother you that much?

[RWB]

On 9/17/2021 at 1:59 PM, Woods020 said:

Did you take the time to look at all of the photos of the coin from differing angles? Can you say you see wear in the other photos/angles of this coin? Or are you using the one picture, with what is just as likely shadows as wear, to accuse professionals (3) who do this every day of making a glaring mistake? Yes it happens but if you think this is the smoking gun I think you are mistaken. Reverse high points also show no wear. 

Yes. It requires only one lighting angle to show the wear. PF-58 is the only possible "grade." That many agree with Mark or other $$$ oriented folks is OK with me. I expect - require - honesty in any coins I buy for collecting purposes; if others don't care, or wish to delude themselves, and that does not impact others, that is their option. BUT - it is not an option, in my view, for any TPG or others purporting to "grade" coins.

Edited September 17, 2021 by RWB

[JT2]

On 9/16/2021 at 4:57 PM, MarkFeld said:

mint state and Proof coins aren’t downgraded to AU due to prints.

well they would never be downgraded to AU but they would be downgraded to low PF 60's or  high PF 50's  and if they werent then i woldnt trust who ever graded it.  It may also be the product of being dropped once3 or twice but that would also kill the grade.

[zadok]

...whistleblower??...in numismatic terms is that one step up or one step down from opinionated windbag?...

[MarkFeld]

On 9/17/2021 at 2:58 PM, RWB said:

Yes. It requires only one lighting angle to show the wear. PF-58 is the only possible "grade." That many agree with Mark or other $$$ oriented folks is OK with me. I expect - require - honesty.

Just because others disagree with you - in this case, with your close-minded conclusion based upon images - doesn’t mean they’re dishonest and motivated by money. You keep throwing that out there, perhaps because you don’t have a solid basis for your declarations.

I’m open to the possibility that the coin should have been graded lower. But I haven’t seen it in hand and neither have you. Even if we had, however, our opinions would be opinions, not facts.