Does PCGS recognize a proof Saint?
daltex
Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
I saw this https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1921-20-pr64-ngc-cac-jd-1-r8-as-a-proof/p/1333-16001.s?ic2=mytracked-lotspage-lotlinks-12202013&tab=MyTrackedLots-101116 in an upcoming Heritage auction. I'd be astonished if it doesn't sell for far more than I'm able to pay. My question is does PCGS recognize a 1921 proof? There is nothing apparent from the Pop Report. Would it be possible to cross (at possibly a lower grade)?
0
Comments
I’m guessing they do recognize it based on this: “ The coin offered here, now graded PR64+ by NGC, was graded MS63 by PCGS when it first appeared in the Bowers and Merena sale in 2006. ”
If just two exist, I’m sure they can pull the coin out of the pops when NGC grades it, even if they aren’t sent back the tag.
Yes, but it was graded MS by PCGS, thus my question.
My guess is that it's like this one.
There are a few saints that neither recognize / attribute.
It kinda looks like the Hesselgesser 21 a bit...Maybe...???
https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1921-20-ms65-pcgs-cac/a/1173-5453.s
Hesselgesser...
"proof"
Look at the die imperfection between the letters in R & T
My Saint Set
BTW....
If I had the $, I'd be like.....
I'd rate it behind the 33 as greatest saint in existence.
1 1933
2 Hesselgesser 1921
3 Judd 1776
4 1927-D
5 Ultra-High relief
As always...YMMV
My Saint Set
Both 1921s shown are very pretty coins with strong strikes. But look at the difference in the squaring of the rims. Not the same animal in my opinion.
My bad... I saw the 63 and just read "oh, NGC upgraded it." I didn't notice the MS/PF designation. I wonder if it was graded along the lines of MS with a designation about the finish (perhaps what today would be graded SP--that not MS, not PR middle ground) where calling it a proof is more semantics than anything else.
I would say yes, primarily for what sellistore says, square rims.
With their green sticker, CAC agrees with NGC in their proof designation.
A few points worth noting on proof saints....
A single set of dies was often used on more than one hydraulic metal press and many adjustments were made.
Rim profile is something that can be played with.
Proof dies are very nearly the same as production dies. In all likelihood they are selected from the best examples after hardening.
Many "proof" coins that didn't pass inspection were thrown in with business strike coins.
(according to Roger Burdett in his latest book on saints)
My Saint Set
Interesting take. Would certainly like to hear from CAC if that was intended.
Of course that was intended. I’m sure CAC saw the “Proof” designation 😉and if they thought the coin was a business strike, they wouldn’t have stickered it. But you don’t have to take my word for it. From the current
description of the lot:
“CAC founder John Albanese saw the coin for the first time on a black velvet tray before it was certified by NGC, and spontaneously offered more than $1 million for it. In a July 2013 Coinweek interview he noted:
"I knew instantly it was a proof the first time I saw it. Since 1978 I've viewed several hundred thousand Mint State Saints and perhaps a hundred proofs. This one doesn't look like any of the Mint State coins, but does have the look, texture, and fabric of the proofs I have seen. This was a no brainer."
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Inserting facts and evidence...will you never learn?
I had the same question as the OP when I got the flyer from Heritage. According to the description by Heritage, there are two proof 1921 double eagles - the NGC 64+ being offered at the ANA sale and one graded SP58 by PCGS sold by Sotheby's in 2000 to an "East Coast Saint Gaudens collector."
I can't find anything on the PCGS SP coin in the pop reports or CoinFacts other than a mention of two special strikes by Ron Guth.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Of course @Mfeld is correct. However, the easiest way to check what attributes CAC is intending to sticker is to check their population report. This 1921 "Roman Finish" PR 64 is listed right there.
Any idea why PCGS would use the designation SP rather than PR?
The “SP”/“Specimen” designation tends to be used for coins that look to have been specially made, but for which there is no official documentation. But I think you already knew tnat.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
just a note those two coins have what appear to be the same die crack though the end of liberty on the Obv. Looked hammered not proof but I have never held them in hand. I think stuff like that comes from the Breen fruity imagination days of old coin tales. there isn't even a logical tale why there would be a 21 saint proof.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
They both appear to have "special handling" which is one of the requirements.
Multiple strike "doubling" would cinch it but I'd have to check them out under 50X & that isn't going to happen.
I'd need full access to the entire data bank of 1921 high resolution coin facts pictures & that isn't going to happen either.
I'm on the fence but leaning toward "something very unusual/special."
Here is a real satin proof to look at
One thing is for sure though...The grades on both the 1921 coins are totally off.
I mean like absurdly off.
My Saint Set
I’m in awe of your unparalleled ability to grade more accurately from images, than PCGS and NGC can, by assessing the coins in hand.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thank You.
Stick around...I will likely have more opinions on the subject you may find insightful.
My Saint Set
@Crypto - Calling it a proof, as opposed to a specimen, is not germane in but the most trivial technical way.
Missed the Sotheby's (Rosenstiehl?) coin, but on Brian and Danny's coin my memory is very clear. Beyond that, David W. Akers, the all-time greatest authority on 20th Century Gold, described this coin as "having strike and texture qualities" he'd "never before seen on a '21 Saint". Not Breenishly Roman-like an '09 or '10, the surfaces are unlike anything else. Blatantly special, much more so than so-called Proof MCMVII $20's. These last are surely (if only superficially) dramatic, but the '21 Specimen is actually shocking in its "uniquity", I may have my dates mixed up, but I think Breen was dead before the "discovery" of the PF58. That's OK, he made plenty of other stuff up. 99% of his output was accurate.
@ReadyFireAim Which grade(s) for which coins(s)? This is the second time today I've read absurdly off statements by you on specifically-dated Saints. Earlier today you grossly mischaracterized some features of '07 NM's. You speak very confidently for one so misinformed. Have you forgotten the spiritual task inherent in your "loose cannon" hair-shirt of a Forum profile name?
I'd be happy to hear your opinion on the detail differences between the original & Barber saint designs.
I would also be interested in how you would justify the grades on the two 1921 saints.
As always...Pictures are helpful to support your argument.
Please use common English words so I can understand you perfectly.
Well that is just mean
My Saint Set
@ReadyFireAim - I'm not talking to you. I already consider you hopeless. I'm addressing others whom you've misinformed. I don't grade from pictures. I don't grade with words. I grade with my eyes. That's how I co-founded NGC. Please genuflect appropriately or, optionally, chance losing mucho dinero and buying fewer coins though ignoring my advice.
I consider this to be not mean per se, but cruelly accurate and, in your particular case, based on this last comment, tragically insightful.
When backed into a corner, you and MFeld both reply with the same tripe.
Then there is always something about how great I am.
(Throw in a little straw-man, false equivalence & ad hominem)
My Saint Set
You give yourself far too much credit regarding your grading abilities, as well as in being able to back either of us into a corner.
It’s one thing to attempt to grade and provide an opinion based on an image. It’s another, entirely, to make statements, such as “One thing is for sure though...The grades on both the 1921 coins are totally off.
”
I mean like absurdly off.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
>
@ColonelJessup
While of course you’re right about the OGs and their opinions regarding the context of seeing bulk and picking out the exceptional, plus most of breen’s stuff was not only accurate it was ahead of its time. That said he did drift from observational to speculative/Fanciful occasionally and the period his opinion was levied is relevant to the merit of it as well. Same of the OGs did that as well in various percentages simply being human. Aren’t the best graders basically just people who can quickly rank where something falls along the panoply of preservation they have witnessed opposed to people merely trying to interpret textbook merits?
That said the OG are supposed to be challenged by new eyes + the arrogance of youth and being right should be easy to defend.
My points on the 21 saints are simply
-Proofs were situational at the mint that year although the dollars show that people were dabbling.
-Not a proof die shown by the crack and normal strikes or polished planchet which leaves modified finish which would be applied post striking.
-that should be verifiable and not opinion based no matter how strong the opinion.
My original rambles were more a question and statement of skepticism rather than fact. I don’t know but would love to see the evidence that led others to certainty.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
I like and appreciate your four points.
I'm going to kick out records/documentation because they sometimes don't exist. @RWB can bite my shorts,
If it were a '21 P$1 we might have the so-called Satin proof dies for a starting point. For this coin, we don't.
Nobody has anything totally probative.
No one has taken the heavy magnification shots and now they never will.
Even @MrEureka, one of my go-to-guys for technical details and analysis, would be stumped. But only for explication purposes. From pictures. If it's not in-hand, On this coin it's in-hand or go home.
The smartest guys with the most astounding amounts of experience don't always agree.
All of them have looked at what they evaluate in-hand.
They looked at a hundred thousand Saints, a million Morgans, a billion dollars (or two or three) of coins, then they stuck in their thumb and pulled out a plum and said what a good boy am i.
It's called a gestalt perception. And no matter how well it's taught, it takes a hundred thousand Saints of looking before your own private light bulb "pops". After the first 50 proof St.G. $20's, they get grooved in too.
Work in the grading room or (eventually) take someone's word for it. That's not arrogance, just an operational explanation for how this knowledge is accumulated. Not by looking at TruViews.
Next, a tutorial from last year's Cy Young award winner on how to throw a knuckle-ball
Motion studies, nuances of fingernail hygiene, estimating wind speed by monitoring nose-hair disturbances and personalized advice on where to hide the Vaseline when the mojo ain't pumpin'.
Mark, Mark, Mark! What can we possibly know about coins!
Sure would love to have another look at the one that came through ANACS.
TD
Where’s the option to “Love” or “Frame” a post?😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Crypto You raise a good point..... the various "Proof" and "Proofish" dollars of 1921 just might have inspired somebody at the Mint to strike a few special $20's as well. I have mentioned elsewhere the little old lady who came in to ANACS with a 1921 Saint that had been given to her by her Uncle as a birth year coin, said Uncle having been one of the two gentlemen who served as Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint in 1921. Sadly she had polished the coin repeatedly over the years so I could not tell you if it ever was a Proof, but if I was the head cheese at the Mint I would have giver her a Proof!
. > @CaptHenway said:
For the record I love mysteries and would love to prove them all legit, but like breasts I consider them all fake until further inspection.
I love the debate and research almost more than the coins them selves
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
The Hesselgesser 1921 doesn't come close to the ANS coin, which would grade at least two points higher. Wish I had better pics, but here you go.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
These are the videos I got from Heritage...
They don't look like the same coin so something is wrong somewhere.
Check out the partial fin above liberty on the above coin.
Hesselgesser reverse (Heritage)
My Saint Set
My guess is that the coin in the picture provided by Andy is the ANS example, not the Hesselgesser piece. That would explain why “they don’t look like the same coin”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm going to post both links as soon as this site will stop saying my comment needs to be approved
https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1921-20-pr64-ngc-cac-jd-1-r8-as-a-proof/p/1333-16001.s?ic2=mytracked-lotspage-lotlinks-12202013&tab=MyTrackedLots-101116
https://coins.ha.com/itm/saint-gaudens-double-eagles/1921-20-ms65-pcgs-cac/a/1173-5453.s
Holy smokes was that more work than it had to be.
BTW...You "experts" can't even figure out what coin is what and you're questioning my grading skills?
My Saint Set
What were you trying to show by posting those two links?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.