How in the world can ANACS authenticate this?

MrEureka

Certified by ANACS, but what makes them so sure it's real? This thread has nothing to do with bashing ANACS. It's just that I have no idea how I would go about authenticating something that is so far gone. So I don't know how they can do it. Then again, I have no reason to believe the coin is fake. But that doesn't make it real.

Am I missing something?

Longacre

Eureka: I am by no means even remotely adept at grading, but just out of curiosity... why don't you think that the coin is so far "gone" that it cannot be authenticated? To my untrained eyes, it looks like there is quite a lot of detail left. Are there certain things that you look for in this type of coin/date that are indicators of being authentic or not? It would be great to address this so as to educate others on what to look for. Thanks

jcping

If the coin is NoGood, how in the world can Heritage auction this coin?
Don't they have the person who won the world grading champion?

Purple73

Looks like it has a ton of porosity. Kinda like what a casted coin would look like. By no means am I an expert of these things HA! I'm fway far from that. Looks kinda funny.

Possible way to authenticate it is to weigh it maybe? Dunno.

Chris

RYK

Could it be the photography making it look unreal?

MrEureka

why don't you think that the coin is so far "gone" that it cannot be authenticated?

Good question. The coin is heavily polished and has pebbly surfaces from use in jewelry. I imagine that the reeding is also substantially or completely gone. As a result, all of the subtle diagnostic surface qualities are gone. All that remains is design detail. That detail in itself is insufficient to authenticate a coin, as it could easily be a (struck or cast) counterfeit modeled from a real coin.

BTW, if the coin is a fake, the polishing and jewelry damage would probably have destroyed all clues that the coin is fake.

Longacre

Thanks. I learned something today. Now I can go home!

Lakesammman

If you submit enough coins, your likely to get a break now and then!

Thanks for the education - I didn't understand the intent of your original ??

thebeav

Maybe they use 'carbon dating'......But then, I suppose, it would leave carbon spots !!

Paul

Newmismatist

<< <i>why don't you think that the coin is so far "gone" that it cannot be authenticated?

Good question. The coin is heavily polished and has pebbly surfaces from use in jewelry. I imagine that the reeding is also substantially or completely gone. As a result, all of the subtle diagnostic surface qualities are gone. All that remains is design detail. That detail in itself is insufficient to authenticate a coin, as it could easily be a (struck or cast) counterfeit modeled from a real coin.

BTW, if the coin is a fake, the polishing and jewelry damage would probably have destroyed all clues that the coin is fake. >>



Andy - there are still other physical characteristics that can militate towards authenticity: Specific gravity, gold content that corresponds with the correct standard, thickness, diameter, weight (but would be lighter than issue weight due to wear) Gross die characteristics that still remain, and perhaps a few other metalergical factors that I'm not aware of. That said, if the coin were a counterfit made from the correct gold fineness and a copy of a real coin of the exact date, then the "jewelry type wear" could well obliterate the necessary charachteristics that would be necessary to determine genuine vs. counterfit. But perhaps a Q for the ANACS graders as maybe they know something that we don't

morgannut2

I watched them check one of mine at a show. The first thing was weight, that I saw. They also checked the reeding count early on. Numinmatist above I guess has it about correct on other stuff.

JadeRareCoin

newmismatist nailed it: specific gravity analysis.

It is still possible to counterfeit coins that have the correct weight and die characteristics. I once again point everyone to page 13 of Jules Reiver's book on Early Dollars. It contains a story about 2 seemingly identical 1794 Dollars, one of which was owned by the author. One was a cast of the other. They had the same rim ticks, scratches and even a natural planchet flaw.......all in the same location. Impossible!

Since this thread is about ANACS, you would probably like to know that both of the 1794 Dollars were slabbed at ANACS as authentic. However, one was later deemed to be a fake by Walter Breen, Eric Newman and Jules Reiver. It doesn't say how they determined which was the original, but probably used specific gravity or other high tech metalurgical tests.

Nysoto

A digital overlay would confirm the die marriage, but it could be a cast fake. A "ring" test can be done to determine if silver is cast or struck, possibly the same could be done with gold. It could have been struck from transfer dies with the the same gold alloy, I don't know how this could be detected with the amount of wear on the coin, as the specific gravity (density relative to water) could be duplicated. The Reiver coin is an example of a very deceptive fake.

Bill

ms70

Bottom line- The coin looks terrible. I wouldn't want it in my collection.

Julian

When confronted with a possible fake, I first ask myself if I have ever seen another. In this case, I have never seen another fake 1795 $5, so it would be my belief that this coin is indeed genuine and, as previously stated, from jewelry.

mdwoods

This is a great thread.

MrEureka

When confronted with a possible fake, I first ask myself if I have ever seen another. In this case, I have never seen another fake 1795 $5, so it would be my belief that this coin is indeed genuine

Julian - In that case, please send me a list of valuable coins of which you have never seen fakes. Just wonderin', of course.