New weighted Jefferson Sets are up

GQ

Well.......What do you think? Corso is number one, BNE is number two and Carl is number three......My 0% DCAM early proof set really fell (brilliant coins don't count much). How about the circ. strikes?

Enjoy your coins....I do....

NIckelCollector

Have not had a chance to look at proof weightings, spent the last 2 hours trying to get my spreadsheet to calculate the right set rating for the Jefferson circulation series. It does not appear any changes were made in the final proof weightings.

I have the same comment on the proof series that I have on the circulation series - After seeing the results I think the relationship between weight and DCAM bonus is backwards. The weight serves as a multiplier while the DCAM bonus gets added to the coin grade, making the weighting significantly more important. Given the rarity of certain DCAMs one could argue the DCAM bonus should represent the multiplier.


More comments to follow.

Monstavet

I guess the modern proof weights will be up soon then as well. Think I had better make a printout while I am still at number 5! I am sure to fall once they weight it (no PR70s, and no DCAM SMS coins). I am curious to see what ends up happening with the 71 no S and the concept of a proof variety set that contains only one variety...

bigt

Here we go again, pcgs takes a simple system and totally confuses it, I can live with my drop to seven, but Carl's drop is not right!!
Keep it up pcgs and you will force us all back to raw coins, not a bad idea.

CarlWohlforth

I think Frank is on to something about the weights being backwards. It is not that I think the rankings are wrong. In fact BNE got himself a 1958 in 68 DCAM and a 1942-P in 68, awesome coins. It is just that for these early Jeffs I think DCAM is very hard. I would rather have my 1956 in 68 DCAM than BNE's 42-P in 68, but it looks like that '42-P would be worth much more to one's ranking.

So a weight of 6 for 1950 and earlier seems a little much. Also a DCAM bonus of 3 for the 50s coins and one of only 2 for the earlier ones is plain backwards.

While I think the weights need work I think BNE's set is pretty awesome and would look just fine in 1'st or 2'nd place. Frank has me beat mainly because of his '50, '51 and '52. We have the same grades in the '42-P and earlier and the '56 and later are all weighed 1. The '50 and earlier are weighed 6, the '51 is 5 while the '52 and '53 are 4, the '54 3 and the '55 2. All in all I might prefer Frank's set to mine, but only because he has more DCAMs than I.

I guess there is no place for the varieties anymore. I don't see a slot for the reverse ofs nor do I see a with varieties set.

RGL

This is the first series I have seen weighted lately where no changes were made to reflect the input of registry set owners. It obviously places a premium on obtaining the 38-50 proofs in high grades and diminishes high-grade coins from the 50s. Look at CGM ... he has all CAMs and DCAMs from 1950-64, yet his set takes a big hit because his 30s and 40s are "only" 65s.

CAM and DCAM bonuses are off since not incorporated into weighting and instead are add-ons ... If you could obtain a 38 DCAM it would carry no more point premium that a 64-DCAM. That makes no sense. Same on CAMS. There is no recognition of CAM rarity on coins such as 50 and 57, etc.

The old system was better, I think, than this mess. And, I do not say this because my set slipped. I was No. 10 and still am, although there are different sets both ahead and behind me now and in different positions. Is weighting of individual coins even necessary if you are not going to incorporate CAMs into the basic equation? Sure, it helps to evaluate and position sets in progress, but it's a wash once you are at 100 percent.

BNE

I agree than my set should not be above Carl's. (At least, not YET!) But clearly the new weightings have some anomolous results caused by the heavy weighting of earlier coins. The weirdness is even more pronounced in the lower-ranked sets.

For example, The Rush Family Collection (which is now ranked 20th) is only 29% complete and consists solely of '42 and earlier proof Jeffersons in really run-of-the-mill grades. My Brilliant Set (sorry for the plug) is 57% complete, and consists of the highest graded proofs for every year (except for three, which I am working on) from '50 to '64, and includes three Pop 1 coins, and three more with a half-a-dozen or less. It is ranked 25th. All the coins in both sets are brilliant.

Frank is right that the weightings are skewed too heavily for the earlier coins. They ought to get a boost, but it's not like a '38 in a decent grade is impossible to find.

P.S. Carl -- You SAY you'd prefer your '56 68DCAM to my '42-P PR68, but you haven't seen my '42! Gorgeous surfaces and heavy mother-of-pearl toning on the obverse: sea green, pink, and sunset russet behind Tommy's head. The reverse looks CAM, and also has similar toning, but more subtle. Man, some day I have to get a scanner and digital cam so I can upload a photo of it.

CarlWohlforth

Oh, I'll bet I'd like your '42-P, it is just that I like cameo contrast. I was thinking about SP's set. I was thinking I'd like a 68 Cam better than a 68, but then realized SP might have a 68 that is almost cam. So I'm sure each set has it's own stand out coins. They all must be great.

Since we each have different tastes and would make different trade offs we probably would rank the sets differently from each other. That is if we could see the coins side by side.

I think BNEs brilliant set example shows that the weights are too high for the earlier dates.

BNE

I was just trying to goad you into touting your '56 68DCAM, Carl! How's it look? I love the deep contrast ones, too. (I'm conflicted.)

P.S. Judging from the '53 that Steve sold to RGL, it sure looks like his set had 68CAMs that were not attributed as such.

CarlWohlforth

I forget which of my 50s DCAMs is the weakest. My '50 in 67 Cam has better contrast than the weakest DCAM of mine. My '40 is almost Cameo. Those are the unsung hero's of my collection.

BNE

Your mention of your '40 that looks CAM highlights another screwy thing about the weightings. Why only two bonus points for the pre-'50 DCAMs, and only one point for pre-'50 CAMs? These coins are extreme rarities. I think the pre-'50 CAMs should get a two point bump, and the DCAMs at least three (the same as the 50's) and -- probably more fairly -- four bonus points. There is only one -- total -- DCAM for all six Jeff proof issues before 1950. I think the proud owner of the 42-P in PR66DCAM ought to get extreme recognition for possession of that coin.

NIckelCollector

After looking at the weightings again, I think it is a mistake the early Jeffersons have such high weightings.

Again I believe the weightings and the DCAM bonus are backwards - more "consideration" should be given to DCAMs.

Personally, I still view Carl's set as the #1 all time finest.

RGL

I have e-mailed this thread to both BJ and Rick Montgomery. Let's see what kind of response we receive.

GQ

'38 to present circ strike Jeffersons are up.....Corso is number one with a 68.16. Finest possible rating: 68.16. Wow......................and 146 coins total!

NIckelCollector

I've spent several hours trying to get my spreadsheet to tie out to the weighted set ratings. I'm almost there. The finest possible rating should be around 68.63.