Excellent example of false grading 1 1

[MarkFeld]

On 9/17/2021 at 3:10 PM, JT2 said:

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.

Not necessarily. I’ve seen many mint state and proof coins graded higher than the one in this thread, with prints. So I guess you wouldn’t trust PCGS or NGC.

[zadok]

On 9/17/2021 at 4:10 PM, JT2 said:

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.

many of the garrett, norweb, eliasberg et al coins in ms65 or above holders have fingerprints...i doubt u would ever get a consensus that they r au or low grade ms coins....as for "cabinet friction" on unc coins, its a well established n accepted norm in the numismatic community, has been for decades n will remain so...only a few misinformed n obstinate persons r in the minority that assert otherwise....once again opinions do not equate to facts...

[Woods020]

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 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.

I have respect for both of you, but I hate to see someone get bashed. I have only had a few interactions with Mark, and he doesn’t know me from Adam, but he has been kind enough to take his time to give me opinions on a few coins. He didn’t have to do this and he gave me wonderful information. I also acknowledge what he does day in and day out. When it comes to grading I’ll trust Mark’s opinion every time. When it comes to Mint history or scholarly articles I’ll side with you. Regardless I hate to see anyone get rocks thrown at them for simply saying a picture, cherry-picked out of many by the way, isn’t sufficient to give a definitive grade. I know would be highly critical of TPGs if they graded that way and would give no credence to that grade. If anything I think Mark is being responsible in saying I can’t say for sure from a picture. I’ll respect that any and every time that someone knows enough to say I can’t tell you from a picture. It’s a bad look to criticize that level of maturity in my opinion. 

[RWB]

This was copied from a post “Difference Between AU58 and MS60 Article” by PCGS member DisneyFan. It seems relevant to the present discussion and need for absolute honesty in “grading.” [https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1063573/difference-between-au58-and-ms60-article]

“Despite the unequivocal objective, wear-based differences separating an AU58 coin from being an MS60, there are many subjective reasons why some collectors may prefer an AU58 over its MS60 counterpart. The awarding of an MS60 label doesn’t guarantee that the given coin will necessarily look especially nice for its grade, and there are many cases in which a collector might find a nicely preserved AU58 the superior specimen from the standpoint of eye appeal. Furthermore, the AU58 will also likely cost less than the similar MS60 specimen, due to its lower technical grade.

Then again, when it comes to raw numbers, the MS60 does offer the collector the higher technical grade. Consequently, in the case of the PCGS Set Registry, the MS60 at the most basic level provides a higher score to the collector than the equitable AU58 could mathematically offer. Yes, the MS60 might cost slightly more – maybe much more – than its AU58 counterpart, depending on the coin. But at the end of the day, the MS60 does afford the collector potentially better positioning for their collection on the PCGS Set Registry, and this can mean the difference between an award for having the best set and being a runner up.”

[RWB]

On 9/17/2021 at 4:27 PM, Woods020 said:

I have respect for both of you, but I hate to see someone get bashed. I have only had a few interactions with Mark, and he doesn’t know me from Adam, but he has been kind enough to take his time to give me opinions on a few coins. He didn’t have to do this and he gave me wonderful information. I also acknowledge what he does day in and day out. When it comes to grading I’ll trust Mark’s opinion every time. When it comes to Mint history or scholarly articles I’ll side with you. Regardless I hate to see anyone get rocks thrown at them for simply saying a picture, cherry-picked out of many by the way, isn’t sufficient to give a definitive grade. I know would be highly critical of TPGs if they graded that way and would give no credence to that grade. If anything I think Mark is being responsible in saying I can’t say for sure from a picture. I’ll respect that any and every time that someone knows enough to say I can’t tell you from a picture. It’s a bad look to criticize that level of maturity in my opinion. 

Mark is right in stating that one cannot usually form a grading opinion from a photo. I fully agree, and should have stated that much earlier. This proof half dollar is a clear exception, and the posturing to make it otherwise is not serviceable. The photo shown was not "cherry picked." It is part of any normal range of photos some of which show certain details better than others. That the abrasion is less evident in other photos, does not make the one highlighting wear wrong or deceptive. Mark and I do not agree on coin grading - largely because I have no financial interest in the result, and believe that only repeatable, data driven results should, be used to establish a legitimate "grade." (Incidentally, that is also what is necessary to get Courts to support civil actions against overgrading and misrepresentation of coins.) His opinions are formed from working exclusively in a $$$-based environment where anything that increases sales or profit is the goal. Slippery grading, or calling AU coins "virtually uncirculated" or "cabinet friction" as one semi-old time shyster loved to do, are not acceptable.

Now -- if the PF-58 half were to be pulled back, and the owner made good for any loss in market value, that would go a small way to improving credibility. But I really doubt that will happen - even after pigs fly.

[gmarguli]

On 9/17/2021 at 12:58 PM, MarkFeld said:

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?

Just for the ones in my collection and only what I consider the useless provenances. I'd never remove something like Eliasberg or even something more specialized, like Rhodes for Tibet coins. I will remove "Big Mike Collection" that no one knows who it is or anything that was put together by going into the marketplace and buying a high grade set over a short period of time. I have zero respect as collectors for these people. 

I also view many of the provenances as participation trophies. Hey, your set is the 5th highest on the registry and only missing the 3 key dates. It's eligible for a provenance on the inserts. 

[MarkFeld]

On 9/17/2021 at 5:32 PM, gmarguli said:

Just for the ones in my collection and only what I consider the useless provenances. I'd never remove something like Eliasberg or even something more specialized, like Rhodes for Tibet coins. I will remove "Big Mike Collection" that no one knows who it is or anything that was put together by going into the marketplace and buying a high grade set over a short period of time. I have zero respect as collectors for these people. 

I also view many of the provenances as participation trophies. Hey, your set is the 5th highest on the registry and only missing the 3 key dates. It's eligible for a provenance on the inserts. 

Got it, thanks.

[numisport]

On 9/17/2021 at 3:11 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. 

So coins can be uncirculated while having been in circulation. No they really can't just by definition. Oh yes I know what you mean. It just sounds funny.

[MarkFeld]

On 9/18/2021 at 1:07 PM, numisport said:

So coins can be uncirculated while having been in circulation. No they really can't just by definition. Oh yes I know what you mean. It just sounds funny.

I’d state is as something along the lines of: Some coins which have seen very brief circulation don’t display any wear. As a result, while they’re technically circulated, they can still be graded mint state/uncirculated on the grading scale.

[Woods020]

On 9/18/2021 at 1:07 PM, numisport said:

So coins can be uncirculated while having been in circulation. No they really can't just by definition. Oh yes I know what you mean. It just sounds funny.

It all has to do with wear. No one has tracked a coin throughout its life since it left the mint. Therefore no way to know if it has been “circulated” or not. All that can be done is evaluate the coin and see if there is noticeable wear, and the level of wear is what takes us through the progression of the grading scale. Uncirculated is a misnomer in some ways and trips some people up. Think of it more as “unworn” vs “worn” instead and it may make more sense to you. 

[Cat Bath]

I don't know squat about seated half dollars but my 1st thought was weak strike. 

[casman]

RB:  I’m still wondering about the peace dollar plaster molds being cast in iron or bronze?

I think a person admitting they were wrong also goes a long way in improving credibility.  
 

 

Edited September 24, 2021 by casman

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/18/2021 at 2:44 PM, Woods020 said:

It all has to do with wear. No one has tracked a coin throughout its life since it left the mint. Therefore no way to know if it has been “circulated” or not. All that can be done is evaluate the coin and see if there is noticeable wear, and the level of wear is what takes us through the progression of the grading scale. Uncirculated is a misnomer in some ways and trips some people up. Think of it more as “unworn” vs “worn” instead and it may make more sense to you. 

 

On 9/18/2021 at 2:44 PM, Woods020 said:

No one has tracked a coin throughout its life since it left the mint. Therefore no way to know if it has been “circulated” or not. 

There was a thread recently, members may recall, wherein the subject of the posts, an eBay seller, liberally sprinkled it with his own grading system; a two-digit number, followed by any number  of ➕  marks beside the grade "UNC." One of the enumerated comments made in response to the post, by @RWB, was so interesting that I have never seen an observation like a nowhere like it -- or a retort since.  The coin had a few ding marks along its rim, clearly visible to any alert reader which indicated "circulation." Coins do cascade from the mint chute but my understanding, fine-tuned by those more familiar with the process, is not with enough force to produce that type of damage. That was a noteworthy comment that made my desire to acquire the coin through competitive bidding -- as my fellow member whom I respectfully call The Great Zadok, a moot point, right out of the starting gate.

[numisport]

On 9/18/2021 at 2:29 PM, MarkFeld said:

I’d state is as something along the lines of: Some coins which have seen very brief circulation don’t display any wear. As a result, while they’re technically circulated, they can still be graded mint state/uncirculated on the grading scale.

Yes I understand how this works. Just look at Bust coinage especially halves. Many mint state Bust Halves have friction and even light circulation rub. Although it's hard to say if these are mostly older holders or newer grades. Any comment ?

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/17/2021 at 11:39 AM, RWB said:

.... It's especially sad that the present owner seems to think his AU-58 proof....

Yes, I know, old thread, but there is No Way I am going to be forced-fed "AU-58 proof." 

This flies in the face of what was inculcated in me from birth as a newby in the 1950's: the term, "proof," is a process, not a "grade." 

Now see what you gentlemen have gotten yourselves into?  One giant slippery slope littered with bruised egos, posturing, an alienation of professional affection for each other best illustrated by @Alex in PA.'s choice of emoji... what a mess! No wonder @VKurtB gave this a pass.   🤔 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 9/17/2021 at 4:21 PM, MarkFeld said:

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.

I think Mark makes a fair point.  We can differ on grades, even MS vs. AU, and that's not because someone is necessarily dishonest but honestly sees the coin differently.

The fireworks on grading seem to not come from the numerical increments within MS or AU or EF....but the grading of circulated vs. uncirculated with the quantum drop in the number associated with it.  And since the whole "friction" and bag marks stuff is in the eye of the (be)holder....we're never going to have a definitive answer on that.

[VKurtB]

On 12/11/2021 at 10:53 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I think Mark makes a fair point.  We can differ on grades, even MS vs. AU, and that's not because someone is necessarily dishonest but honestly sees the coin differently.

The fireworks on grading seem to not come from the numerical increments within MS or AU or EF....but the grading of circulated vs. uncirculated with the quantum drop in the number associated with it.  And since the whole "friction" and bag marks stuff is in the eye of the (be)holder....we're never going to have a definitive answer on that.

If someone insists on the existence of a hard and fast rule about the line between the 50’s and the 60’s in grades, and we do have one, he uses 3 initials here, we have someone completely out of touch with modern standards. I like this coin at PF63.

[Simple Collector]

I think it is a great looking coin. I am by no means an expert on the older coins like these, but I wouldn't mind owning it! If believed it is overgraded why not send it back and ask to have it reviewed? Pretty sure NGC offers that service. PCGS probably does as well.