Home U.S. Coin Forum

Who's ever seen a matte proof Standing Liberty? Here's one in an ANACS holder.

Although they've been talked about, I've never seen one labeled as such in a TPG slab.

I see nothing on this coin that would indicate it's anything other than a standard MS intended for circulation.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/222687371296

«13

Comments

  • Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I agree from just the image. Perhaps there are diagnostics on the coin. That's going way, way out on a limb if they don't know something we don't.

  • CryptoCrypto Posts: 3,381 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Smoke and mirrors, people chasing bigfoot and the right person submitting at the right time. Only a fool would buy that coin for more than normal UNC type prices

  • TommyTypeTommyType Posts: 4,586 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You have to admit, it is an exceptional strike! But good strike does not equal "proof".

    Easily distracted Type Collector
  • bcdeluxebcdeluxe Posts: 207 ✭✭✭

    Philadelphia 17's are the most hammered of the entire series. The reverse is nice, but the obverse is not struck any better than most MS coins.

  • TommyTypeTommyType Posts: 4,586 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bcdeluxe said:
    Philadelphia 17's are the most hammered of the entire series. The reverse is nice, but the obverse is not struck any better than most MS coins.

    Having spent over a year looking for the "right" MS-63/64 Type 1, I'll just say I would have jumped on a coin with that shield, head, and leg drapery on a single coin. Better struck than most years? Yes. Always THAT well struck? No.

    Easily distracted Type Collector
  • koynekwestkoynekwest Posts: 10,048 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don't think I'd trust that attribution.

  • oih82w8oih82w8 Posts: 11,889 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice coin...but not that nice.

    oih82w8 = Oh I Hate To Wait _defectus patientia_aka...Dr. Defecto - Curator of RMO's

    BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
  • DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If it crossed to a 64FH it would break even. If it crossed to 65FH it would be great. If it made 66FH Home Run!

    Looks pretty nice to me, but I don't know the series.

  • RayboRaybo Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nope.

  • Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The coin is supposed to be a PROOF. That's all that is important in my opinion. Is it? What are the diagnostics?

  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 21, 2017 8:22PM

    No 1917 proof quarters were made. Wally didn't know how sandblast and satin proofs were made. His letter is worthless.

    There are a few early strikes from new dies that have exceptional detail and minimal luster, but these are all within normal a manufacturing range. (The Mitchelson collection has several.)

  • Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well ANACS, what about it?

  • mannie graymannie gray Posts: 7,259 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I agree that is is an exceptional coin, but to say it is a proof.......shame on ANACS.
    Maybe it is a "mechanical error," lol

  • RayboRaybo Posts: 5,273 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @mannie gray said:
    I agree that is is an exceptional coin, but to say it is a proof.......shame on ANACS.
    Maybe it is a "mechanical error," lol

    Why "Shame on ANACS?"

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,826 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Raybo said:

    @mannie gray said:
    I agree that is is an exceptional coin, but to say it is a proof.......shame on ANACS.
    Maybe it is a "mechanical error," lol

    Why "Shame on ANACS?"

    "Shame on ANACS" if they are labelling a business strike as a proof. On the other hand, maybe it is.

    What's odd is the starting price. If that is one of maybe 10 actual proofs, it is worth waaaay more than $500, in my opinion. The seller must know that it is unlikely to be viewed as a proof in the community at large. Although, it's not impossible.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,826 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 21, 2017 10:24PM

    I don't know. Hard to tell from just photos. But, I think that IS what I'd expect the satin proof to look like, at least on the obverse. The reverse seems a little weaker than I'd expect for a proof strike although the fields are right.

    Might be worth $500 to find out. As DimeMan said: if you could cross it to MS64FH, it's almost a break even. If you could cross it as a proof, it's gotta be a $25,000 coin, or more.

    Bigger mystery: how did they get to a 63? I don't see any dings

  • MoldnutMoldnut Posts: 3,082 ✭✭✭✭

    There is a reason it's still in that holder.
    Still a nice coin though.

    Derek

    EAC 6024
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 33,471 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @RogerB said:
    No 1917 proof quarters were made. Wally didn't know how sandblast and satin proofs were made. His letter is worthless.

    There are a few early strikes from new dies that have exceptional detail and minimal luster, but these are all within normal a manufacturing range. (The Mitchelson collection has several.)

    Unfortunately Walter Breen wrote a fair number of these letters which made claims about coins that were inaccurate. When I was a young collector in New Jersey, these letters used to pop up in bourse cases all the time at the local shows. It didn’t seem to do much to improve the salability of the coins in question, which were often “optimistically priced.”

    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Certainly a very nice specimen...... will be interesting to see where the bidding goes on this coin. If someone wanted to 'play the game', I think this would be a good candidate. Cheers, RickO

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,826 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ricko said:
    Certainly a very nice specimen...... will be interesting to see where the bidding goes on this coin. If someone wanted to 'play the game', I think this would be a good candidate. Cheers, RickO

    I'm not sure you even have to cross it over. Look at the "proof" that Heritage sold raw in 1997 for 11,500. I think you just need to get it in a Stack's or Heritage auction and have them hype it a little bit.

    I wonder if it would CAC? :smiley:

  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 33,471 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I wonder if it would CAC? :smiley:

    It's going to have to cross to NGC or PCGS as a Proof to have that happen. I can't see this coin crossing as a Proof.

    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 31,529 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @RogerB said:
    No 1917 proof quarters were made. Wally didn't know how sandblast and satin proofs were made. His letter is worthless.

    There are a few early strikes from new dies that have exceptional detail and minimal luster, but these are all within normal a manufacturing range. (The Mitchelson collection has several.)

    Just as a point of order, the Breen letter illustrated was not issued for this coin. The seller says so.

    That said, the Breen letter is worthless for whatever coin it WAS issued for.

    TD

    Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
  • oih82w8oih82w8 Posts: 11,889 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 22, 2017 10:29AM

    The ANACS Certification number matches their database. Several on this forum has attested that ANACS is very good at variety attribution...rare unaccounted for proofs would be a different story.

    There are a few people who have dropped their line in the fishing pond hoping to snap a "big one".

    oih82w8 = Oh I Hate To Wait _defectus patientia_aka...Dr. Defecto - Curator of RMO's

    BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
  • KollectorKingKollectorKing Posts: 4,820 ✭✭✭✭✭

  • earlycoinsearlycoins Posts: 282 ✭✭✭

    Image appears to be digitally sharpened.

  • davewesendavewesen Posts: 5,831 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @oih82w8 said:
    The ANACS Certification number matches their database. Several on this forum has attested that ANACS is very good at variety attribution...rare unaccounted for proofs would be a different story.

    There are a few people who have dropped their line in the fishing pond hoping to snap a "big one".

    except the population shows none - I feel it is a mechanical error
    the reverse is non-remarkable although the obverse shows promise

  • WoodenJeffersonWoodenJefferson Posts: 6,491 ✭✭✭✭

    I'm in the 'mechanical' label error camp and besides, why would the designation FH even come into play if this were a true matte proof specimen?

    Chat Board Lingo

    "Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,069 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Blue holder means the coin was in the small white holder previously. Does Anacs have the original records when that coins was attributed, it could have been 30 years ago? Their guarantee covers authentication only on Blue holder coins. Their current gold holder has a grade guarantee.

  • dizzleccdizzlecc Posts: 1,111 ✭✭✭

    Let's say it is a mech error. Would it cross? The toning on the reverse may be a concern.

  • cmerlo1cmerlo1 Posts: 7,891 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 23, 2017 8:35AM

    My 2 guesses:

    1. It was submitted to ANACS long, long ago, with a Breen letter stating it was a matte proof. There was a time when that meant something... now, not so much.
    2. Later, it was sent in as a reholder and thus did not go to the grading room. ANACS had a short period where they used the blue labels with their current slabs. Currently, the blue labels are still used to denote that a coin has been reholdered.

    CORRECTION: Looked again and realized it was one of the rounded blue holders. It still could've been a reholder done during the early Austin years of 2006-2007. In 2007 (I think) they switched to the holder style they have now, with blue labels. They switched to the gold labels no long after that and still use the blue labels to denote reholders.

    OR (most likely)

    It's a mechanical error. I'm confident there was no one at ANACS in 2007-ish when the blue labels were used for all coins that would certify any SLQ as a matte proof. Tim Hargis was the head numismatist, Randy Campbell was one of the graders, as was Mike Ellis. I'm friends with Tim and will ask him if he remembers this coin.

    You Suck! Awarded 6/2008- 1901-O Micro O Morgan, 8/2008- 1878 VAM-123 Morgan, 9/2022 1888-O VAM-1B3 H8 Morgan | Senior Regional Representative- ANACS Coin Grading. Posted opinions on coins are my own, and are not an official ANACS opinion.
  • TommyTypeTommyType Posts: 4,586 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @logger7 said:
    Blue holder means the coin was in the small white holder previously.

    I did not know that....Ya learn something new everyday.
    (I should have noticed. GC had one of my sales items reholdered, and it came back blue without me even noticing....)

    Easily distracted Type Collector
  • aus3000tinaus3000tin Posts: 369 ✭✭✭

    Can we so a high end MS for comparison & contrast ??
    What about diagnostics ??
    Are the rims squared ??
    Are the denticles sharp & detail sharp ??

    Chris

  • aus3000tinaus3000tin Posts: 369 ✭✭✭

    Appears the is a gash in the chin & one in the wing left side.
    What documentation warrants it to be a proof ??
    Are there other coins including Lincolns & Buffalos which are designated proofs ??

  • TomBTomB Posts: 20,725 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Mechanical error?

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

    In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson

    image
  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,826 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @aus3000tin said:
    Appears the is a gash in the chin & one in the wing left side.
    What documentation warrants it to be a proof ??
    Are there other coins including Lincolns & Buffalos which are designated proofs ??

    neither of those marks preclude it being a proof. Proof is a methodology not a degree of preservation. Heritage sold a proof-1 a few years ago

  • RINATIONALSRINATIONALS Posts: 171 ✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @Raybo said:

    @mannie gray said:
    I agree that is is an exceptional coin, but to say it is a proof.......shame on ANACS.
    Maybe it is a "mechanical error," lol

    Why "Shame on ANACS?"

    "Shame on ANACS" if they are labelling a business strike as a proof. On the other hand, maybe it is.

    What's odd is the starting price. If that is one of maybe 10 actual proofs, it is worth waaaay more than $500, in my opinion. The seller must know that it is unlikely to be viewed as a proof in the community at large. Although, it's not impossible.

    There's plenty of shame to go around even among some 'bigger & better' grading services. There are a few 1820's era Bust proofs still in holders that wouldn't holder as proof today. Mistakes get made, it really comes down to how good any TPGs guarantee is. The only shame ANACS would deserve here is if they deliberately put a coin they knew was not a proof into a new holder stating it was just to avoid a big blowup with the person who resubmitted it (If that happened). Actually doesn't make a lot of sense to resubmit to get into a new holder, probably more salable in the old white 2x3 cache. As many times as ANACS has changed hands over the years I'm doubting the current owners would be liable for something done 20 or 30 years ago.

    buying Rhode Island Nationals please email, PM or call 401-295-3000
  • Dave99BDave99B Posts: 8,351 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Business strike. Nice coin.

    Dave

    Always looking for original, better date VF20-VF35 Barber quarters and halves, and a quality beer.
  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Very nice! Good example of why true AU coins can be very desirable - much more so than so-called "mint-state."

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,826 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @RINATIONALS said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @Raybo said:

    @mannie gray said:
    I agree that is is an exceptional coin, but to say it is a proof.......shame on ANACS.
    Maybe it is a "mechanical error," lol

    Why "Shame on ANACS?"

    "Shame on ANACS" if they are labelling a business strike as a proof. On the other hand, maybe it is.

    What's odd is the starting price. If that is one of maybe 10 actual proofs, it is worth waaaay more than $500, in my opinion. The seller must know that it is unlikely to be viewed as a proof in the community at large. Although, it's not impossible.

    There's plenty of shame to go around even among some 'bigger & better' grading services. There are a few 1820's era Bust proofs still in holders that wouldn't holder as proof today. Mistakes get made, it really comes down to how good any TPGs guarantee is. The only shame ANACS would deserve here is if they deliberately put a coin they knew was not a proof into a new holder stating it was just to avoid a big blowup with the person who resubmitted it (If that happened). Actually doesn't make a lot of sense to resubmit to get into a new holder, probably more salable in the old white 2x3 cache. As many times as ANACS has changed hands over the years I'm doubting the current owners would be liable for something done 20 or 30 years ago.

    It wasn't me putting the shame on them. Just me explaining what the previous poster meant by the phrase.

    If ANACS ownership is continuous, the later owners would likely have assumed the liabilities of the prior owners.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,826 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Broadstruck said:
    Either that's just a mechanical label error or it was graded on Whiskey Wednesday at ANACS instead of Taco Tuesday. It's a business strike all day and the close up images have been juiced a bit. Also it was shot with a point and shoot camera which is much easier to capture all the SLQ details at different angles then a DSLR in fixed copy stand. Below is a photo of my 1917-S AU58FH which is a early business die strike and if you look at the fields is more stain proof like then the eBay coin.

    That's a very nice AU58. I don't think it really proves anything about the eBay coin, however. Hard to say much of anything about the eBay coin without it in hand.

  • BUFFNIXXBUFFNIXX Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 22, 2017 7:11PM

    i have a 1917 type one with fully matte proof like surfaces & details that looks more like a matte proof than this one. Heck, guess I better send it to anacs (yuk-yuk-yuk!!) since I may be able to get it called a proof instead of just proof like. Yep, think that is what I am going to do. (Got this coin in 1995 from a Heritage auction where it was described as “MS65 matte proof like and it really does look like a proof)

    Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
    a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
  • BUFFNIXXBUFFNIXX Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It is listed in the ANACS certification data base. The cert number is 2922687 which is on the reverse of the slab.

    Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
    a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
  • BUFFNIXXBUFFNIXX Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭✭✭

    This coin is currently in the ANACS database. The type of holder the coin is in was issued by the current ownership of anacs.
    so they do think it is a proof IMO.l

    Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
    a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
  • Coin FinderCoin Finder Posts: 6,953 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Why ANAcs, or why not PCGS?? it looks nice but not sure about "proof" status..

  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,146 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That an impressive strike

  • BUFFNIXXBUFFNIXX Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭✭✭

    About 15 years or so ago I saw a 1917 type one standing liberty quarter that was in a SEGS proof-63 (cleaned) holder. Despite the fact that it was cleaned it “had it all”, surfaces and strike, you name it. In my mind it was a no questions matte proof that really did just jump right out of the holder and grab you. No question. And it was in an SEGS holder because the
    biggie services will not even give a sniff to 1917 proof coinage. Thats just a fact of life, the way it is now and will always be IMO. But getting back to this coin the picture does not look like a proof coin to me, but of course you have to see the coin in hand to make a final determination.

    Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
    a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
  • oih82w8oih82w8 Posts: 11,889 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The outside edge of the shield is HAMMERED @Broadstruck!

    oih82w8 = Oh I Hate To Wait _defectus patientia_aka...Dr. Defecto - Curator of RMO's

    BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file