Options
Can you pass Scott Traver's Coin Quiz?
TopographicOceans
Posts: 6,535 ✭✭✭✭
COIN QUIZ: HOW TO TELL IF YOU’RE AS EXPERT AS THE PROS
I love answer C for question #2
I don't understand #16 (I went with
so I got 4 wrong 
I love answer C for question #2
I don't understand #16 (I went with
so I got 4 wrong 0
Comments
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
#16 states which of the following is "not" a sound method = I got that one right but got 5,13 & 14 wrong - if I read 5 more carefully then I probably got that ok
Very enjoyable and thank you for sharing. Scott Travers is a great guy and very enjoyable to speak with. He is very willing to help a collector in many ways. One of the best eyes in the business!
4 Wrong. Other than the two ANA questions and gold question, I missed the bell lines question. Don't focus on Bens. Thought there were 6 lines. Oops.
Fun!
Not so sure I agree with #2 or #3. I tried to grade near unc/unc coins in the sunlight in my formative years and often got fooled by that. Sunlight, flood lights, and overhead florescent lighting is all deceptive. And since when do marks on a coin have any bearing on whether it's mint state or not? That shouldn't even be in the discussion. And I wouldn't be surprised if you couldn't cause some metal edge or surface loss trying to shoe horn a $20 gold coin into a tight mylar flip. Since you can easily impart a surface hairline with those flips........then a hairline on the edge is not much harder....and both represent metal loss, even if only a few atoms worth.
And on #7E being the correct answer....even if the ANA stated those four things in 1987....they're all absurd imo. No wonder the TPG's came about in 1986/1987 with malarkey like that circulating around.
The best graders in the world do accurately use their brains to "add up" the effect of all those marks....and they were doing that in the mid-1970's when I first started paying attention. There never would have been a PCGS had they not been able to do that with reasonable accuracy and repetition. And today the best graders are typically within a few tenths of 1 MS point, if given ample time. They do the same thing with luster, eye appeal, strike, etc. The mind is a beautiful thing. Good thing I never bought the 1987 ANA grading guide or I'd been hosed up for years. I hope this stuff isn't in current editions. If anyone got #7 correct I'd be interested to know how you did that (ie review your old grading guides once a year for good measure, etc). If collectors were running around back in 1986/1987 figuring that a 3 point MS grading variation was "acceptable," no wonder the scammers had flourished and the FTC descended upon the Rare Coin market. Most of the dealers I worked with from 1983-1986 didn't consider even a 1 point variation as acceptable. The biggest factor in becoming a "pro" is grading and authentication.
I'm now interested in picking up a copy of that 1987 ANA grading guide for my own library. And INSAB couldn't have been far behind the ANA if they were advising the public to grade coins under a stereo microscope.
I too thought there were only 6 Bell Lines. Then again, on most slabbed FBL's I see, I don't even see 6 of them being "full."
Tom
<< <i>Wow! I thought this was a joke at first, but it isn't. And I passed, but I certainly didn't "ace" it! I go t 6 wrong. Better start studying. >>
Don't worry, I got as many wrong as you. The more time you take, the more you get wrong. Reminds me of a combustion boiler licensing exam I took back in 1990 where they were asking questions about riveted boilers....lol. So maybe this "exam" to go pro is a spoof on the world as seen in 1987.
Not to beat a dead horse. But on #7 the ANA first states that:
(C) detracting marks cannot be measured, counted or otherwise mechanically assessed to arrive at an accurate grade
and then then go on to contradict that in D and E:
(D) an MS-67 coin may have three or four minuscule contact marks, with one or two in prime focal areas, and an MS-68 also may have three or four minuscule contact marks, with none in prime focal areas (an MS-69, however, may only have one or two of these marks, with none in prime focal areas)
So you can't count marks to come to an accurate grade....but then you can count them to grade a coin 67, 68 or 69. Really? Did I just read that? I'm changing my mind. If anyone got #7 right, they should slap themselves right now....even if they own a 1987 ANA grading guide and actually read and remembered it.
<< <i>
<< <i>Wow! I thought this was a joke at first, but it isn't. And I passed, but I certainly didn't "ace" it! I go t 6 wrong. Better start studying. >>
Don't worry, I got as many wrong as you. The more time you take, the more you get wrong. Reminds me of a combustion boiler licensing exam I took back in 1990 where they were asking questions about riveted boilers....lol. So maybe this "exam" to go pro is a joke on the world as seen in 1987.
Not to beat a dead horse. But on #7 the ANA first states that:
(C) detracting marks cannot be measured, counted or otherwise mechanically assessed to arrive at an accurate grade
and then then go on to contradict that in D and E:
(D) an MS-67 coin may have three or four minuscule contact marks, with one or two in prime focal areas, and an MS-68 also may have three or four minuscule contact marks, with none in prime focal areas (an MS-69, however, may only have one or two of these marks, with none in prime focal areas)
So you can't count marks to come to an accurate grade....but then you can count them to grade a coin 68 or 69. OK, so that's as clear as mud. >>
Go figure....and that was one of the ones I got correct!
Tom
<< <i> Go figure....and that was one of the ones I got correct!
Time to turn pro TPRC. You can study up on the job.
I got my laugh for the day taking this quiz....65%. Just passing....lol. Missed a couple that I shouldn't have. It's good for keeping my blood pressure down.
The more I look, the more I don't agree. #5 for instance. There are many exceptions to some of the "absolutes" stated in these 20 questions. I can think of coins in the same grade having widely different striking and still be worth the same money (ie the weakly struck draped bust dime has monstrous luster, very few marks, and wild eye appeal. The same coin (date/mm-type) with a sharp strike, weakish luster, neutral eye appeal and numerous marks is graded the same. I can see them being worth the same money....or more likely, the weaker struck coin being worth more since luster and eye appeal drive so much of grading today). Generally, the weaker struck coin would not have been given the same grade as the well struck coin unless it had superior off-setting attributes. It's up to individual buyers to assess in person which coin is worth more. I saw a number of coins in Newman, Gardner and Pogue that could be called "weakly struck." Yet, some of them had superb luster, few marks, and great eye appeal to make them better overall choices than a so-so example with a sharp strike. "Strike is king" for type coins went out in the 1970's. It's still king on FH's, FBL's, and FB's.
One could go further stating that no two rare coins could possibly have the same market place value since no two coins can be identical in all attributes. One of them is always deemed superior by the knowledgeable majority. And if we toss in the ANA 3 point variance, it really wouldn't matter if one were weakly struck or not since the ANA 3 point variance (ie MS63 = MS66) would probably more than cover any value shift due to striking alone.
And fwiw, a pair of 20c pieces, Large cents, small cents, 3c nickels, 3c silvers, nickels, or even capped bust halves, where one of the coins is weakly struck.....do not have any reeding.
I missed 4, 7 and 14.
I had never even heard of #4
Not intimately familiar with #7
I don't do Franklins. #14
<< <i>Really cool quiz - did well
#16 states which of the following is "not" a sound method = I got that one right but got 5,13 & 14 wrong - if I read 5 more carefully then I probably got that ok >>
So I was tricked by a trick question
really, none of the answers seemed right. As for the other question, try to differentiate between AU and MS coins in
sunlight sometime. Think Scott got that one wrong, or at the very least there are two correct answers.
#4 is simply historical trivia.
#19 - I am OK with looking up bullion value of Saints if needed. The choices were all within 4% of the right answer, That tiny range makes me view that one as a nitpick question as long as I'm not a bullion dealer.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
<< <i>I wonder if Scott Travers could pass my coin quiz. >>
If your quiz includes webmaster skills, he would be in trouble -- I see a lot of 1998 technology on that website!
BTW I got 80% (and two of them I would dispute), but I am not quitting my day job.