Can someone explain - points lost with 2005 update

Parkekal

I have never been that mindfull of which coins bring how many points, and frankly, am not sure I understand all of the calculations. I collect coins I like and have met many wonderful people in the process... most throught eh PCGS site. Edson Santos, for example, taught me alot about Kennedy halves and finally allowed me to buy his set so that I could compare my coins with his and select the ones that I liked best to keep. We had the exact same score since we had coins graded the exact same way and same weighting. He retired his collection before adding the 2005 coins and had a score ending in .31. My set, identical to his also ended in .31. Made sense to me. Now that the 2005 coins count my set score has dropped to .30 even though my 2 2005 halves are PR70DCAMS. The finest set (Which Eddie did a fantastic job building) does not have those required coins but has a score remaining at the .31. I don't get it. I would love an education on this one. Thanks

Parke

LindeDad

Without doing all the math I would say it is a product of the rules of rounding in math.
You have DCAM bonus times the year bonus times the grades them it is divided by the number of coins. When you added two more coins in your set the math rouned you down to .30 where the Santos set stayed at .31.
Only answer is where is that last and only PR70DCAM.
And for those that don't realize what all this means Congrates on having the Two best sets there are.

wondercoin

Parke: Sounds like a problem with the Registry system. Your set should have never dropped beneath Edson's after adding (2) additional PR70DC coins for 2005 IMHO.

Wondercoin

dunerlaw

Correct me if im wrong, but coins in this series dosn't get bonus points for cameo desiginations after 1978.
Therefore all ms70 are worth 70 points so your average will slowly go down with each additional year.
Since it was over 70 to start with. IMO

Parkekal

OK, I understand the part about the average score dropping due to the weighting of the earlier coins... but what about the completion percentage. This suggest that I could get the first coin a series in the highest grade possible and then retire the set immediately and, no matter now long the series was or how many coins required, the one coin would always be valued higher as a collection than an entire set of perfect coins (assuming that the weighting of the other coins does not exceed the first coin).

I do appreciate all of the replies....

So, one more quick question... . some of you show links to your sets on your messages.... how do you do that?

thanks again

Dan50

Fact is, the years you recieved the 2 bonus points for your proof 70 DCAMS pushed you above 70.00.
Now the best grade you can get is 70
That means you will ever so slowly be pulled down in grade each year.

It's the fact that you don't get the bonuses you did earlier thats bringing you down. You can't add 70.00 coins and maintain a 70.31 GPA

Last years finest possible set rating should have been 70.32
This will also come down each year from now on. As this also can not be maintained without the bonuses.

STEWARTBLAYNUMIS

Parkekal - That is how the saying "Modern Crap" evolved.


Stewart

ellewood

Stewart...I noticed that you are currently 26th in the lincoln basic proof registry at 98% completion. Are you planning to de-throne someone this year? Why 98%...have you not added in YOUR "modern crap" for 2005?

Russ

Parke,

The 2005 coins do not have the extra weight of the early dates (1964 through 1971) so it makes perfect sense that the point total would dip a bit. That said, once the database adjusts you'll be back on top because Edson's set is no longer 100% complete.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

Okay, something weird is going on. Bear's set just jumped back in to the top five all time finest showing 100% complete, and it stopped in 2002.

The Jay Ross collection.

The database is definitely screwed up.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

The William G. Scheibe Jr. is also showing 100% complete. It was also retired in 2002.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

Geez, it looks like ALL the retired sets have been updated to 100% complete - both mine have.

Russ, NCNE

Parkekal

Stewart, your kind affection of my newly minted coins is overwhelming. I believe I sat at the table with you in San Francisco and heard part of the passion by which you descirbe coins of he last few decades. I do admire your passion. For me, I just have not found the 05's that I think match my set yet. I have been focused on my half dollars quite a bit and you will be glad to know that my halves extend back to 1857.... so hopefully you don't feel all of my efforts are in vain. LOL

STEWARTBLAYNUMIS

Ellwood - The modern crap 2005 s Lincoln cent in Proof 70 is bid on Teletrade at $600 plus the juice AND the tax.Its alsop expensive to be #1 in any category that includes "Modern Crap"

Parkekal - Maybe I'm blind but I can't tell the difference between a Proof 69 or a Proof 70 Lincoln cent or a Kennedy half.I think the rule PCGS says is if you submit 500 coins you will get 1% or 2% Proof 70's.That sounds like paying for the grade.

Russ - Stop typing and looking,typing and looking,typing and looking or you will get a serious obsessive compulsive disorder.

Stewart

Russ

<< <i>Russ - Stop typing and looking,typing and looking,typing and looking or you will get a serious obsessive compulsive disorder. >>



I already have it.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

<< <i>Maybe I'm blind but I can't tell the difference between a Proof 69 or a Proof 70 Lincoln cent or a Kennedy half >>



You are blind.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

<< <i>Its alsop expensive to be #1 in any category that includes "Modern Crap" >>



That it is.

Russ, NCNE

monsterman

Parke

change to ngc....i did

and here is why...my morgan set.....another collector....(where as i saw most all the coins he bought before they got to him )...had me by 2 points...why i couldnt give you an answer as the system was terrible back then ( looks like it still is )...anyway my point loss were in the 4 genric dates 79 s...82s....91s as he had 68s and i had 67s....anyway i loved those coins and knew they were 68s but i wasnt going to play the game and buy 68s ...i just wasnt going to do it...anyway....he had a 92s in 65 which was a 55,000 coin...mine was 67.....

so here why the system was so stupid....i could of sold my 92s in 67 and bought a 66 and also bought the 3 generic dates in 68....and put 80,000 in my pocket and passed him on points

the fact is my set as it was should of been ranked higher and i had higher graded power coins.....but the system did me in

looks like you got the shaft too

btw...by going to ngc if your set is really better youd have more star coins...and the star seperates the field

monsterman

ps...also back then the registry was run by the valet parker out front...i faxed him a copy of my 93s three times.....and he blew it each time thus its missing from my set even to this day....guess he did know how to put paper in it

Russ

Well, after multiple eMails with BJ, it appears you're SOL Parke. Even though it has never been this way in the past, she is insisting that sets which were retired at 100% remain at 100% no matter how many coins they are missing.

Russ, NCNE

wondercoin

Only solution(?) - Edson needs to request that his set be removed from the Registry entirely. Frankly, that solution should be unacceptable to everyone involved - Edson shouldn't have to do that. PCGS needs to fix its Registry.

Wondercoin