Improperly cleaned vs. market acceptable
logger7
Posts: 8,094 ✭✭✭✭✭
The various top grading services use the "cleaning" description on problem holders as a term of disapprobation. NGC goes a little further with "improperly cleaned". I was checking out a Bust half that had come back for a customer as "improperly cleaned" by NGC, the collector lost heart, sold it cheap to the dealer, he in turn dipped it in MS70 removing a little residue and presto! A very likely MS62-63 coin next time submitted worth multiples of the wrongly shamed coin.
I have seen Bust halves that look too bright, one 1829 graded AU55 at Icg; a few months later cracked out NGC called AU58 prooflike at NGC! So where is the line drawn? If the coin looks coherently lustrous though overdipped but not problematically so, does it have a good chance of a straight grade? Which service is more lenient?
Comments
There is NEVER a line, only a zone.
Small comfort
.
The good Colonel is correct... it is a zone... both in appearance and judgement.....An area Rod Serling could have made into a series...."You are now entering 'The Appearance Zone'.." Or... 'Fifty Shades of Cleaning'.....
Just remember, whatever you get, it is an opinion.... and you know THAT saying... Cheers, RickO
Or....'Some Like It - NOT!'..... This could be fun....
I am enthused about hearing this as @EAC, @Overton, @Pre1838Gold, @NT/QT/AT and @A/B/C/D/E/Bean/NoBean are already scratching their collective heads over statements from
@Sorry-IcountedthehitsonyourMS68typecoinandyourMS67++clearlygotagratuitousbumpforeyeappeal,
@JewelLusterYeaorNay, @MarketAcceptableYeaorNay, @FH/FB/FBL, and others besides @OldFartsKnowThisSaying.... that both agree with and contradict factors they consider relevant.
@OzmandiasNotSoMuch
I myself have no confusion whatsoever as to why a cracked-out MS66 1866 G$1 with two hairlines and 1100 die striations has "cleaning", especially as two former no-grades in the same package worked.
If you have a "details" coin, it is very rare to have it straight graded at another service. Cleaned or improperly cleaned on a label ONLY indicates a coin that is continuously hairlined over its surface. This can be due to anything from improper drying to light buffing! I've even seen brightly polished coins with rounded design details in a slab with "cleaned" on the label.
Any thoughts on this one as to a numerical grade? http://i.imgur.com/gWkhrTD.jpg http://i.imgur.com/P64H0JF.jpg http://i.imgur.com/GR8PtxU.jpg http://i.imgur.com/M35UCeU.jpg
Unusual, perhaps, but skilled in-hand graders find jewels called "junk" quite consistently.
LOL! Thanks for increasing my record of disagrees. Next, my remarks only concerned "Details" coins in slabs - not "raw" jewels that are plucked from the hands of the ignorant. Therefore, I cannot understand what you could disagree with in my post.
In spite of that, Judging by what I see for sale, both raw and slabbed in MOST DEALERS stock, you may be the only "skilled in-hand grader" in the country who can turn a cleaned "details" coin into a gem.
A "proper" cleaning doesn't leave hairlines on the coin. Scrub too hard, or with too coarse a grit, and it'll be "harshly cleaned".
Of coarse as others have said, it's a spectrum, but you get the idea.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I hear some folks say, it's been cleaned so I'll just put it somewhere and let it tone up and send it in again. I have my doubts about that one. How do you unclean a coin?
That skill set is R-5, not R-8. Maybe those other dealers sold their revenants before you got a peek at them.
Myself, cleaned coins (raw/slabbed) into gems, really not so much.
Coins in "cleaned,details" holders? 
We actually agree much more often than not, especially on the quasi-hypertechnical, like "Is the Norweb '93-S MS-60". But if I claimed it was done via reverse electrolysis, you would ionize me with your counter-arguments.
Your fetishization of the "disagree" function suggests unresolved underlying conflicts about dealing with authority. But hey, cheap thrills are hard to find. In a very sad way, I secretly envy your enjoyment
You know about the experiments on mice with radio receivers implanted in their brains?
The mice think that's the Agree button, but they're evidently wired differently
The last 2 details coins I bought were in NGC details holders, but looked great. A head scratcher, really. So I bought them and I cracked them and sent to PCGS ... one graded MS61 and the other graded AU50. FWIW...
There is never a line, only a zone...
That is probably the best answer to this question I have read
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
We ask a lot from our 15 seconds of grading time.
@ColonelJessup posted: "Your fetishization of the "disagree" function suggests unresolved underlying conflicts about dealing with authority. But hey, cheap thrills are hard to find. In a very sad way, I secretly envy your enjoyment
"
Just as you relish, using your infinitely huge vocabulary, and many virtually undecipherable, rambling, sentences that seriously cloud much of the important points you are sharing (at least to a few of us with high IQ's): I relish being "different" and "standing out" among my peers.
Although most of my disagreements were probably undeserved, they stand out and may cause members who look at my profile to wonder what-the-heck did this guy post! Nevertheless, a disagreement from you and several other important members of this community (when actually deserved and justified with a rebuttal to my post) is appreciated. I enjoy a good discussion as it educates me further.
So, may I please have some more.
PS Let's get back to the subject in the OP.
Coins with badly impaired luster / damaged surfaces from cleaning marks will get the details grade.
Coins conserved well maintaining lustrous surfaces (like dipping silver BU silver halves with PVC haze) most likely get a straight grade. It's a subjective zone.
Anyone who has submitted a sizeable number of coins knows this statement to be, unfortunately, wishful thinking
Some coins are obvious cleanings, but if you've got one in "the zone," another submission or three may get the desired result. And it doesn't have to be at another TPG. The same one will often yield.
MS 64 - then Cleaned - then MS 65. Or MS 65 - then Cleaned - then MS 65 - then Cleaned -then MS 66. One coin I viewed as an MS 65+++ went Cleaned 5 times before I was finally granted an MS 64. And there I let it rest.
It happens. It's not an exact science but some are real puzzlers.
As I wrote above:
If you have a "details" coin, it is VERY RARE to have it straight graded at another service. That is my experience and I have seen "details" coins straight graded on VERY RARE occasions. The other result happens commonly where one TPGS "details" another services coins. This usually happens when NGC or PCGS details a straight graded coin from ICG or ANACS. Most of these coins I've seen would have passed IF the submitter would have sent them in raw!
Now that you have responded stating that you have evidence from a sizeable (?) number of coins, until I can prove to myself otherwise I will amend my opinion to:
If you have a "details" coin, it is RARE to have it straight graded at another service.
Here are couple of head scratchers when it comes to "market acceptable. This 1796 half dime got a VF grade.
NGC bounced this one back to me in a body bag for "improper cleaning."
I have seen 1796 half dimes in a straight grade, AU-50 holder that had been polished and AT'd. It was plainly obvious that the coin had had considerable work done to it. Yet this one got flagged.
It's a fine line between what I like and what others don't. That said: "I like coins".
On that note : I like to call it "rejuvenating", as opposed to "proper, or improper" cleaning or even restoration, as terms of endearment go.
I agree, only my line is much wider than most.
A dealer showed me a later date Bust half someone wanted sent in on express at the other service that came back Unc. details improperly cleaned. He did a quick dip to get the smudgy residue off and it should go well into the Unc. grades now.
There should be a remedy at PNG or the ANA when a grading service severely judges a good coin as "improperly cleaned" is an objective judgment nullifying much of the value of a coin. Recompense for the wronged party should involve a lot of compensation in keeping with all the trouble to get a resolution.
You have some really nice coins, Bill. I can see a VF on the first one in spite of the color. The coin is not attractive but it looks natural and it is a solid VF IMO.
Eventually, the second coin should be straight graded. Unless we don't see the problem. Looking at coins and photographing them straight on can hide many obvious problems. Unless a coin is tipped at an angle and rotated into a particular position, problems can even be missed using high magnification.
The first 1796 half dime is not natural. It was the victim of an improperly neutralized dip. It surprised me that it made it into a “no problem” holder.
The second 1796 half dime really surprised me. I expected it to come back in a VF-30 or 35 holder, but NGC sent it back in body bag. Excuse me, but after looking at the breaks that NGC has given to problem coins, they had a lot crust jamming me up like that on this piece. Most every coin of this vintage has been messed with at one time or another. This coin had far fewer than many of the pieces I’ve seen NGC holders. Some of them are sitting in my collection.
logger7 posted: "...and it should go well into the Unc. grades now." We'll have to wait and see.
As to a "remedy"...IMHO, that's nuts. Most of the dealers and collectors I run into cannot grade or authenticate themselves out of a paper bag. We all should be extremely thankful that MORE THAN ONE TPGS exists for a second OPINION. I'll remind you and others that an opinion is just that and you will have a hard time proving anything as each claim to have their own standards!
Finally, all we need is more claim filling do-gooders to screw things up more. That's why we have beautiful reproductions ruined with the word "COPY" on them today in order to protect idiots!
The "market" votes with its money. That's why over two dozen TPGS are no longer in business.
i disagree; if NGC or other grading service repeatedly make bad errors with calling non-cleaned coins cleaned or over-grading coins there needs to be a useful remedy rather than the bogus assertion is that it is all relative, no one knows, etc.. There is probably over 80% agreement among the top graders.
Disagree all you wish, our opinions mean nothing in the "real world. As for CU, I stated before, your opinion is "nuts."
We are talking about a very small number of coins "called cleaned" with great upside. Maybe it's 95% agreement on the rest.
I'm not talking about cleaning opinions in this paragraph.The world-class graders never score 75% in the Grading Room. A minimum 25% wiggle room. Consensus is valued over accuracy. Unanimity is not a requirement.
BTW, 80% of the top graders are not currently working at TPG's
Grading is informed, not defined, by science. It is an art
.
More accurately described as a skill than art, imho
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Unless the good colonel suggests graders get creative in their assessments of quality?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
"HRH explains exactly what grading is - world class graders agree 75% of the time. And when they don't agree, they are usually pretty darn close. Just because it's not 100% objective doesn't mean you get to legally throw the baby out with the bath water." https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/295472/another-court-case-involving-grading/p1
Plus when collectors go up to one of ICG's grader's at a coin show with already graded coins from NGC or PCGS and he says he will give the coins a certain higher grade, a point or two he is doing something unethical.
That friend logger is a pretty serious accusation. I will not bring up the last time you misspoke about a TPGS grader. That time, I contacted the grader who you named and misquoted in a public forum. I know he called you on it.
There are only two graders at this grading service (ICG) who give free opinions at shows. So which one, Randy or Skip, supposedly told you they would grade your coin two grades higher? What type of coin was it? Which TPGS under graded (?) it in the first place if indeed it was under graded by ICG standards.
I do know of cases where a coin jumped two grades in a cross. I also know of cases where a detailed coin was straight graded. In fact, I know that one grading instructor told his class that while he worked for PCI in TN, dealers would approach him at shows to brag how many PCI problem coins were crossed to straight grades at other services!
Aside from that, IMO it is rare for detailed coins to be straight graded today. Additionally, it is very rare for coins to jump two grades unless we are talking about a strictly graded AU becoming a Mint State coin which is common as both dirt and the opinions of small-time, rookie, coin dealers.
Look @logger7
Finding court cases where some fly-by-night crooks have a slab service that holders cleaned AU Morgan dollars as MS-67 PL does nothing to make your case. I believe the state attorneys, postal inspectors, and FTC are pretty much on top of this when notified. Fortunately the half a dozen active TPGS don't fall into this kind of fraud.
PS Please don't forget to tell us how this bit of hearsay turns out: "A dealer showed me a later date Bust half someone wanted sent in on express at the other service that came back Unc. details improperly cleaned. He did a quick dip to get the smudgy residue off and it should go well into the Unc. grades now."
My fingers are crossed for your friend.
I totally agree but will take the under at 75%. I won't put words in David's mouth, but would think it likely he'd agree if I said 90% if qualified "within a one point range"
Notwithstanding that, I will happily submit my appeal to the genii du jour when its shifting members convene in Denver. Filing fee is $125.
Consider - If my regrade goes up, the results of the previous submission could be construed as "legally throwing the baby out with the bath water".
If I do it: Improperly cleaned
if they do it: . market acceptable
BHNC #203