Help me understand

merz2

I just looked at the 1936-1958 Proof Lincoln Registry Set.How can someone with less coins and lower grades be rated #1 and I'm #2?

bstat1020

I think it is because the series is now weighted. More points for certain coins. For instance the most heavily weighted coin is the 1936 Type2 (Brilliant), he has it in his set, where you do not.
I am not sure 100% yet on the weights. Maybe someone else can add a little more.

Thanks Brian

tradedollarnut

That's the basic flaw in the PCGS registry - it can take 8 common date high grade coins to equal one low grade highest weight coin.

Which is a better set (trade dollars of course):

1875-S MS68
1876 MS66
1876-S MS66
1877-S MS67
1878-S MS67

or

1873-CC AU58????

In my opinion, the first set far outclasses the second set (as if a single AU coin could even be called a set). But you know what the set ratings would be? 5.36 for the first set and 6.67 for the single coin set!!!!!! Say it ain't so!

merz2

Gentlemen
My GPA weight is higher and he's missing 7 coins,I'm only missing 3 coins.

PTVETTER

When PCGS try to weight the sets, they upset people, and I fully understand. Haven't PCGS heard about KISS. The idea isn't that hard. leave well enough alone. If they want to play with the set do it with the Cameo, full steps, and full bands. That is enough, and enough is enough.

tradedollarnut

The idea of a weighted set is a good one, but they are trying to use a shortcut method in an attempt to keep it simple.

The problem is that approach is fatally flawed as I have illustrated above with a real life example. The only way to fix it is to use NGC's method of weighting each grade or use a high grade bonus weight as I've previously proposed.

wondercoin

Don: It seems to me the is really going to be a "moot point" once you fill your 1936 hole with basically ANYTHING. That coin has a weight of 8 and even if you bought a PR60 you would add 480 points to your set and likely "blow away" the competition Wondercoin.

tradedollarnut

But why in the world would you want to do that? If you're not going to settle for a PF60 in the long run, why waste money filling the hole in order to be number one? Under any realistic weighting system, you are number one anyway - isn't it enough to know that for yourself?

MS67PLUS

Don

His 1936 kills your set that one coin counts as 8 66RDs for him . You have a higher GPA but his 48.90 set rating is higher than your 45.68. The PCGS weighting system leaves a lot to be desired and I believe the best way is count what you have and add or subtract for RD CAM DCAM FB FS AND FBL it is a whole lot easier and is is easy to understand.

wondercoin

TDN: You act like I TOLD him to buy a coin! Of course, he should wait to fill the hole, but if someone is going to "get a coronary attack" in the meantime fuming over why he is number 2 (and, again, I am not saying Don is fuming) then buy a $100 coin and solve your "problem" (of course I am not saying Don is having a problem). Capish?

Wondercoin.

tradedollarnut

Wondercoin: I wasn't inferring anything from your comment - I was merely pointing out that responding to a flawed system in a flawed manner seems foolish.

Typetone

Don:

I did the math on both sets and it looks correct. While the system certainly has flaws, in this case the ranking might be justified. For the moment assume your 37 was a RD instead of a CAM, same grade. Then I think we would all agree that White Fang's set is better with the 36 in 66RD. The cost of that piece alone would way more than pay for all the missing pieces in his set at a comparable grade to yours. Where you might disagree is the credit granted your 37 CAM. As I read the bonus scale, you get the same credit for a RD coin as you do a CAM for that year. While I'm not a Lincoln expert, I would guess that 1937 CAMs are much more difficult than 1937 RDs grade for grade. So, the answer may be in the bonus points awarded to RDs, CAMs, and DCAMs for those years. Perhaps you already gave input to PCGS on that point and they didn't listen. But, if you didn't give that input, you might want to try even now.

Cheers

Greg S.

merz2

Both WhiteFang and I have contacted PCGS about the Proof Lincoln Sets.Nothing has been accomplished as of yet.

Typetone

Don:

I sent you a proof Lincoln calculator spreadsheet to the email in your profile.

Cheers

Greg S.

perfectstrike

Hi Don,

Say the word and I'll write another email to PCGS, but I haven't even had a courtesy acknowledgement of the one I sent 3 weeks ago.
I'll continue to watch with interest, but it's no fun to when the games crooked.

Maybe we should use the chat room or better yet, irc, for an all day or half day session where we can come to concensus on what we'd like to see. Then we could forward an email signed by a number of registry participants.

David

Cocoinut

This thread made me curious about the 1936-58 proof Lincolns, so I checked it out, and was surprised to see only 3 sets! Let's have some competition here! There have GOT to be a lot more collectors of these little gems. I checked my list of proof Lincolns, and I just entered them in the registry. I don't know what the weighting will do, and it's too late at night for me to want to try to figure it out, after working with numbers all day. Maybe it will show up in the registry sometime tomorrow. The highlights, if they can be called that, are a 1936 in 63RD (in a first-generation holder; probably a 64 by today's standards) and a 1952 65CAM. No DCAM's, but the 1952-58 are all CAM's. I also have a couple of 1942's that I think are CAM's; haven't sent them in for re-grades yet, but if the set becomes competitive, I might.

Jim

tradedollarnut

Baseball: You and I are in complete agreement that it is rediculous! It is absolutely true and it carries over to all series - as more series get weighted, some people are really going to be hopping mad.

The PCGS weights are set up at the most collectable mint state grades. For trade dollars, this is the MS63 - 64 range. In that range, the weights are very appropriately set. The problem is that all trade dollars are common in circ and all trade dollars are very rare in MS66 and above. The weights simply cannot be as simple as they are and accurate over the whole range of grades.

The 73CC in AU is a fairly common coin (as trade dollars go) and costs around $1500. The five high grade trades have a combined population of about 10 (!) and a total cost of over $200,000. The system simply does not reward high grade examples - to the extent that it is fatally flawed (in my opinion).

Popcoin

It seems to me that every time a discussion is started about set weights the theme turns to cost of a certain coin (date, mint, grade and Cam,Dcam,FH, etc.) vs cost of other coins.

Well PCGS already has a file breaking down the cost of a coin by these factors, it called the Price Guide.

If PCGS would spend the time and energy spent on weighting to correcting and maintaining this file they would solve two situations. 1) could use the price as weights and 2) have a usable Price Guide.

This would also work very well for type set weighing.

Some people have already proposed this (just to simple, I guess) and I know this will never happen.

Just My Opinion,

Larry

tradedollarnut

Larry - you are absolutely correct! In this day and age of computers and spreadsheets, it should be a relatively simple exercise to link the Price Guide to a weighting calculation. That would certainly be a very accurate weighting system!

In my opinion, they won't do it because NGC thought of it first - heaven forbid they'd copy the competition even when it makes sense!

So instead we're stuck with an overly simplistic approach that breaks down except at the most common mint state/proof grades. Of course, they could just keep adding "Phantom Cameo" bonuses to everyone to make up for it!

Just wait until the Morgan collectors find out that a circulated key date beats the heck out of an 86-O, 92-S and 95-O all in MS66 together!!! Ouch!

wondercoin

"The system simply does not reward high grade examples - to the extent that it is fatally flawed (in my opinion)."

This is about as "newsworthy" as "death coins" on the US Coin Forum!! When I identified the "fatal flaws" months ago many members here thought the PCGS system was fair to the "average collector" at the expense of the "rich collectors" and that this was indeed "good". It became a "haves" and "have nots" issue.

If they don't care that a 1932(d) quarter in VF-35 ($100) coin is worth more "points" than a $10,000 MS68 silver quarter (in a series they deem "hot"), do you think they will ever care in the distant future about Trade Dollars!! And, why shouldn't an average collector with average means be able to come within a few points of your set TDN? They handicap horse racing don't they where the best horses have to throw a 10 pound weight on their back Wondercoin. P.S. Is this comment too "pro PCGS" as on occasion I am accused of being

tradedollarnut

It is irrelevant whether they want an average collection to come within a few points of the finest - it's all a matter of scale when the collections are complete. Does it matter if the finest is 100 and an average collection is 99 or 50? Not really - they can dumb it down all they want, after all a 'D' is a passing grade in school these days.

What does matter is for collections that are not complete - which is the better collection. Isn't that what one of the things the Registry is supposed to reveal? I really don't think there's any arguement from serious collectors that a super group of common dates in uncommon condition is better than a single circulated key date. The Registry should reflect this fact or it is useless.

wondercoin

TDN: It appears somewhat clear to me that collectors overall would actually want the Registry weights to reflect their views on coin collecting. In other words, many folks think a common date MS68 silver quarter for $6500 or $10,000 is stupid. Hence, they might support PCGS giving it virtually no weight. Likewise, an MS68 Trade Dollar is "stupid" as well to many. It is very possible that your "package" of 5 coins for $200,000, the average collector wouldn't pay $25,000 for. Hence, why weight them High when MOST collectors wouldn't even consider buying them at a fraction of your price. IMHO, this is basically the "BS" surrounding the super grades getting relatively tiny points. The majority rules.

Incidently, my position all along has been the registry is about great coins, not great collectors. Wondercoin.

keithdagen

It's all really simple. PCGS and NGC have two different weighting philosphies. PCGS uses relative scarcity of a coin to determine the weight of the coin (Irregardless of grade) in a slot. They place the weight at the slot level rather than at the coin level. NGC uses individual rarity, but refuses to tell us whether they base that on price guides, populations, or magic incantations.

You can choose PCGS, where you know exactly which coins will "maximize" your set ranking, or you can choose NGC, where it is anybody's guess on how to improve your set. Unless you are TDN, and can't get NGC to add your Trade Dollar set yet.

Think we've beaten this horse to death.

Keith

Typetone

I'm tempted to comment, but frankly I'm tired of reading and writing the useless drivel and nonsense I normally say about this topic.

Greg S.

DeepCoin

I agree completely with Keith. If you have a completed set, then all the fuss and bother goes away. IF you dont have a completed set, you understand the rules as set up by PCGS. Yes, it is unfair when comparing partial sets, and super high grades may never get their full due here.

One final comment, to create a completely even grading situation with respect to condition rarity versus coin rarity you would have to put in a great deal of programming time and then also pay strict attention to the market as major moves occur in the condition rarity grades. All of this is fairly time intensive and lets not forget this is a Marketing too for PCGS and is offered without cost to the user. To make it completely fair would be rather expensive from both a programming and a maintenance regard. That's it, I am done on this subject (for at least a month anyway)

Steve

Don,
Complete your set. I understand you are close to getting the 1936. Once you are complete, you will be right up there. Please don't get so upset with this registry reporting. Work on YOUR set to make YOU happy with it, and the registry will take care of itself. If you let this become a numbers game, I'm not so sure you will really enjoy it, AND it will cost you a heck of a lot more of your MONEY. JMHO. Steve

merz2

Let me say thanks to all that posted to this thread.I have read and listened to you.I've decided to continue to complete my set as Steve suggests,to please myself.If I am lucky enough to be #1,so be it.If not oh well.I am close to getting the 1936Brilliant in PR65 RD.I'm also trying to work a deal on the 1936Satin in PR65 RD,to complete the set.I'm not optimistic about getting it done by June though.Again you all have shown wisdom and cool heads,when I lost mine.Thanks again for putting things back in perspective.

DMWJR

Well . . . A few days with a crashed computer, and look what happens! "White Fang" is the name of my set, and my dog. No wonder my "wheat ears" were burning.

Don and I have corresponded for some time, and he is truly a first class fellow with an awesome set of Proof Lincolns. Especially since he was the one who broke the flood gates open by having PCGS certify his 37 as the very first early lincoln CAM. I was fortunate to pick up the third one which is a 42 in 65CAM, not nearly the smoker he has.

Don knows that when he fills his set he will chop me up in little peices and feed me to the fishes, but until then . . . . I'm number one, I'm number one, I'm number one, I'm number one . . (sing along with me)

Anyone want to know medically why men snore? It's because when he lays on his back, his nutsack drops over his a-hole and creates vapor lock.

merz2

White Fang
You are in my sights.BTW,I did find out that PCGS gives the bonus points by designation.What that means is if a coin is Cameo,even if it is red it only gets 1 point.Remember when we were trying to get two bonus points,seemed fair it is RD and Cameo.LOL

merz2

DMWJR
My updates are closeing the gap on you old buddy.Take a look. Oh no a new set has been added. Now I really need that 1936 to get ahead.I guess I'll have to rob a bank.LOL!!!!!!!!!!!

Cocoinut

Don,

When you add just one of the 1936's, you should be comfortably in first place. I bought a lot of my proof Lincolns long before anybody had thought of a registry, and all I wanted were some nice-looking coins. I was able to achieve that mostly with PR65's and PR66's, but maybe I'll try to upgrade a few of them now.

Anybody got an extra 1937 proof Lincoln? (65 or 66, no spots or haze, of course)


Jim