Options
If a Proof Coin is Touched by Human Hands, It Is No Longer a Proof

What is the origin of this myth? Was it published in the Redbook or something, and then taken out? I remember being told this when I was a kid, but I have no idea where the information came from.
0
Comments
WS
peacockcoins
<< <i>The OP's statement would be 100% accurate and correct if it wasn't so incredibly foolish and wrong. >>
I don't think the OP was stating it was right. He called it the myth that it is. Just forgot to put quotation marks around it in his title.
PS- I can remember hearing it, too. I'll try to remember to skim my 1976 Redbook. In those days I didn't have much access to the numismatic community, so I learned pretty much everything from the Redbook and Coins magazine.
I have no idea. I've heard it before, but from no one with any numismatic sense.
Lance.
<< <i>I remember as a kid, being told that exact same thing with regards to "uncirculated" coins. >>
I've seen the same thing on this very forum, when it was claimed a coin received in change could not be considered uncirculated.
<< <i>all I knew is that "they were never touched by human hands". >>
That's what all the trained monkeys were for, you know.
<< <i>I was told the same as a kid. I do not remember anything about special polishing of the dies, mirrored planchets, special strikes--all I knew is that "they were never touched by human hands". >>
Apparently, monkey hands were ok.
but I do remember the phrase as a kid back in 1970
in B&M's with bid boards and a lot of collecters, Back
in the late 80's I put together a early Jeff proof set
raw from dealers 2x2 stock and and I still have the
40, 41, and 42 nickel one's that have dyke marks on
the rim from someone that took this myth serious.
Steve
<< <i>
<< <i>The OP's statement would be 100% accurate and correct if it wasn't so incredibly foolish and wrong. >>
I don't think the OP was stating it was right. He called it the myth that it is. Just forgot to put quotation marks around it in his title.
PS- I can remember hearing it, too. I'll try to remember to skim my 1976 Redbook. In those days I didn't have much access to the numismatic community, so I learned pretty much everything from the Redbook and Coins magazine. >>
OP = "Original Post"
(Not: "Original Poster")
peacockcoins
they were special coins from special dies
if they circulated they are to be called "impaired"
What was said previously the silver mint coin is the result of a manufacturing process and as such is priced accordingly. Am I mixing the conversation from what the OP said and what other have said. It would seem to my neophyte brain that the coin is still proof but the value has to be diminished.
That's why kids pants hang down nowadays. We lost the belt.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>Am I mixing the conversation from what the OP said and what other have said. It would seem to my neophyte brain that the coin is still proof but the value has to be diminished. >>
The problem is this - if you tell a five-year old anything, they will believe you. Rationally I hear what you are saying. The problem is that I have this childhood recollection that you are WRONG
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
In short, proof meant perfect.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>I remember as a kid, being told that exact same thing with regards to "uncirculated" coins. >>
Bingo. I think this was the very first thing I "learned" as a coin collector.
I remember a kid telling me (and several other kids standing around) at the Junior High coin club I wandered into. I can still hear his voice in my mind. It's funny how some memories just stick with you.
I also remember thinking much, much later: "HUMAN hands? So a monkey or a dog could touch it and it would still be uncirculated? Sounds like something some kid made up to sound like he knew what he was talking about."
Coin Rarities Online
It's obvious that the sealed mint packages, then big slabs they were packaged in, had everything to do with it.
I know, there were UNC sets as well, but uncs were not exclusively found in cellophane or plastic.
<< <i>You guys must be young - I don't remember what I was told as a kid.
I'm pretty sure that when you were young Lakesammman, coins were oval and made out of electrum. Nobody worried much about "uncirculated" back then.
(Actually, I think we are about the same age, but I couldn't resist!).
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>OP = "Original Post"
(Not: "Original Poster") >>
Braddick- it can stand for either.
We're BOTH right.
So nyah nyah.
<< <i>
<< <i>I remember as a kid, being told that exact same thing with regards to "uncirculated" coins. >>
I've seen the same thing on this very forum, when it was claimed a coin received in change could not be considered uncirculated. >>
An argument for the ages , ive had coins in change that are nicer condition than some that came from US Mint rolls and bags.
>>I've seen the same thing on this very forum, when it was claimed a coin received in change could not be considered uncirculated. >>
Good topic. Actually, how many times do you think a coin could circulate before the TPG's could definitively grade AU, assuming no thumb rubbing or hard contact sliding on a counter. I would think the large the coin, the easier to tell, and maybe 2 or 3 times.
I received a proof dime a while back from my local 7-11 which meant it circulated at least twice, from whomever broke it out of the packet to the cashier then to me. Under a loupe, I could not see any circulation marks and don't doubt it would go Proof 66 or higher. To me, it is circulated, no matter how perfect it looks.
of fine , and I know it's a proof because in that year and denomination
the mint only minted proof coins .
<< <i>
<< <i>I remember as a kid, being told that exact same thing with regards to "uncirculated" coins. >>
I've seen the same thing on this very forum, when it was claimed a coin received in change could not be considered uncirculated. >>
In a technical sense, that is actually true, no? If it has been used in "circulation", then it can in no way be "uncirculated". Perhaps "mint state" is a better word to describe coins that grade 60+ on the Sheldon scale.
<< <i>In a technical sense, that is actually true, no? If it has been used in "circulation", then it can in no way be "uncirculated". >>
If you're grading coins, all that matters is if there is wear and if so, how much. Where the coin has been is not necessarily relevant to the grade.
<< <i>
<< <i>In a technical sense, that is actually true, no? If it has been used in "circulation", then it can in no way be "uncirculated". >>
If you're grading coins, all that matters is if there is wear and if so, how much. Where the coin has been is not necessarily relevant to the grade. >>
Well that would bring me to the latter portion of my first post that a more proper way to describe a coin that would grade 60+ on the Sheldon scale would be "mint state" because it in no way lends to the idea that the coin has not seen circulation. Of course, it is all a matter of semantics.
<< <i>Well that would bring me to the latter portion of my first post that a more proper way to describe a coin that would grade 60+ on the Sheldon scale would be "mint state" because it in no way lends to the idea that the coin has not seen circulation. >>
What if you're selling raw coins on eBay? How would you describe a mint state coin there?
<< <i>
<< <i>Well that would bring me to the latter portion of my first post that a more proper way to describe a coin that would grade 60+ on the Sheldon scale would be "mint state" because it in no way lends to the idea that the coin has not seen circulation. >>
What if you're selling raw coins on eBay? How would you describe a mint state coin there?
Well, I don't sell coins on eBay so I don't know how to answer that question...
<< <i>Another myth about Proofs is that they are double-struck. >>
They're not?
5:19
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen