Isabella "Proof"?? Here is your proof!!!

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 12:02PM

Wire rims, square edges, unbelievable strike. But now for the real question......what is the perfectly etched "11." on the reverse? No one would do that unless it was for a reason, like identifying a sample for approval? It is too small and perfect to be done by a novice.

Finally, I attached the MS68 PCGS photo. (Heritage has the full image). Look at the ribbon in her hair, then look at the ribbon on the "proof", as well as the rest of the strike anywhere. While not as pretty, the strike blows miss MS68 away! End of story!! (At least in my mind. LOL!)

robertpr · July 5, 2012 12:06PM

Is the 11 etched in the coin as you say, or is it raised up? It looks raised in the images?

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 12:34PM

This angle really shows the precise rims.

stealer · July 5, 2012 12:36PM

Not a proof IMO. Edge is not sharp enough, not proof looking at all. Notice where the edge meets the rim, it rounds out. That makes it a BS

GoldenEyeNumismatics · July 5, 2012 12:43PM

The coin does not appear to be a proof, and the "11" is probably a catalog number by a curator.

michiganboy · July 5, 2012 12:46PM

I agree with steeler as well as the strike is not better IMO then the other coin you show just the dark tarnish is accenting it. Wire rims are caused by striking pressure and metal forming around edges of the die does not always mean proof.

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 12:53PM

<< Not a proof IMO. Edge is not sharp enough, not proof looking at all. Notice where the edge meets the rim, it rounds out. That makes it a BS >>

Put a new image up of the rim. If that is not square, what is?

stealer · July 5, 2012 12:54PM

Even with the new picture in your edited post, the "wire" doesn't make it a proof. It could be a sign of a proof, but it doesn't mean it is one.

Revert that post to the old picture and I can point out what I mean for you by it's not square enough

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 12:55PM

<< The coin does not appear to be a proof, and the "11" is probably a catalog number by a curator. >>

LOL! Now that is funny. Do you do the same on your own coins??

This strike is awesome on these cheap pics, you should see it between your fingers!

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 12:57PM

Here is the other pic Steeler asked for. I was trying to get an angle on the 11 but it didn't work out.

michiganboy · July 5, 2012 1:06PM

Here are two auctions both have good strikes and wire rims, neither sellers claims them to be proofs

First

Two
Wonder why that is

stealer · July 5, 2012 1:12PM

A somewhat exaggerated explanation, but I hope the diagram helps. The colored arrows in the top left correspond to the colored arrows pointing on the coin.

RedneckHB · July 5, 2012 1:25PM

AU58 Graffiti, net XF. $175.

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 1:38PM

Under all that toning, there is a cameo also.

CaptHenway · July 5, 2012 1:39PM

<< Here is the other pic Steeler asked for. I was trying to get an angle on the 11 but it didn't work out.

>>

''

This photograph proves it is not a Proof. The rims are well struck, but not the reeding. Notice how the reeds fall off near their ends, i.e., where they approach the rims. Proof reeding should be solid all the way from the obvere rim to the reverse rim.
TD

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 1:55PM

<< AU58 Graffiti, net XF. $175. >>

Here is the last PCGS AU58-CAC sold on Heritage. How do you grade it? F12??

RedneckHB · July 5, 2012 1:57PM

I dont grade it F-12. I grade it $175. Someday you'll understand.

michiganboy · July 5, 2012 2:01PM

Its not much different from yours as far as wear, those marks are on the slab in the heritage photos. What cohodk said was yours has au58 details which it does IMO as well, but a net grade for the damage would cause it to valued at around a XF grade. BTW that engraving is very crude IMO look at the love tokens from that era, some are real works of art.

stealer · July 5, 2012 2:01PM

<< I dont grade it F-12. I grade it $175. Someday you'll understand. >>

Someone's not very happy today

What cohodk is making a reference to how TPGs grade coins based on their value.

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 2:24PM

<< I dont grade it F-12. I grade it $175. Someday you'll understand. >>

Nope, I will never understand. That's why I come here, so that I can follow your wisdom.

Wabbit2313 · July 5, 2012 2:27PM

Stealer, those illustrations are like a John Madden telestrator example! Sweet!

Justacommeman · July 5, 2012 2:32PM

<< 

<< I dont grade it F-12. I grade it $175. Someday you'll understand. >>

Someone's not very happy today

Dave went in to have his tonsils taken out when he was eleven. Instead they removed his feelings.

MJ

lasvegasteddy · July 5, 2012 2:36PM

dave rocks with respect...problems with dave
no cookie for you or that coin

MrEureka · July 6, 2012 2:12AM

First, I agree with CaptHenway.

A few more things:

Virtually all Isabellas are perfectly struck, so a strong strike is not a compelling argument.

Also, there are many fully proof-like Isabellas in existence, all of which have far more "proof" characteristics than the coin in the OP.

Finally, NGC (but not PCGS) has certified a small number of proofs. The NGC coins are solidly mirrored but not cameo'd to any meaningful extent. I believe that PCGS' position is that proofs were not struck, period.

General lesson to be learned from this thread is that the more coins you see, the more likely it is you'll recognize something that is truly different from the rest.

golden · July 6, 2012 3:18AM

Back in the day I handled a number of coins with wire rims that were not proofs.

Broadstruck · July 6, 2012 3:33AM

Based on the eleven your Isabella might be from the Nigel Tufnel collection which was sold on November 11, 2011

renomedphys · July 6, 2012 3:37AM

I have personally found that PCGS is very stringent when it comes to proof determination. I mean, even if the strike is all there, and the proof diagnostics are present, they will still BS a coin just because it looks BS.

So the question is, is that called "market grading" when a proof designation means a substantial price increase? If a proof were worth less than a BS (like an 1877 cent) would the same coin go proof then?

FredWeinberg · July 6, 2012 4:16AM

But didn't Nigel's head explode
BEFORE the Auction took place?

commoncents05 · July 6, 2012 4:41AM

For what it's worth, PCGS has 2 in the population reports, a PR62 and a PR65. The PR65 sold at the Stacks/Bowers auction in February of this year for a little over $40,000. Here is a link to that auction. It is my understanding that while at one point PCGS did certify Isabellas as Proofs, they will no longer do so because there are no markers the definitively prove one way or the other. Same goes for Columbian Proofs.

-Paul

keets · July 6, 2012 6:19AM

General lesson to be learned from this thread is that the more coins you see, the more likely it is you'll recognize something that is truly different from the rest.

a very good point for this thread and a very good point for defense of professional graders when we view pictures and assail their judgement.

Broadstruck · July 6, 2012 6:21AM

<< But didn't Nigel's head explode
BEFORE the Auction took place? >>

During the auction towards the end of Lot #11.

Wabbit2313 · July 6, 2012 12:46PM

<< For what it's worth, PCGS has 2 in the population reports, a PR62 and a PR65. The PR65 sold at the Stacks/Bowers auction in February of this year for a little over $40,000. Here is a link to that auction. It is my understanding that while at one point PCGS did certify Isabellas as Proofs, they will no longer do so because there are no markers the definitively prove one way or the other. Same goes for Columbian Proofs.

-Paul >>

Sure there is a marker, it's an "11" etched on the back! HAHAHA!!!

EagleEye · July 6, 2012 3:44PM

Kove · July 6, 2012 4:13PM

<< It is my understanding that while at one point PCGS did certify Isabellas as Proofs, they will no longer do so because there are no markers the definitively prove one way or the other. Same goes for Columbian Proof >>

This statement is correct for Isabellas, but not for Columbians. There are definitive die markers for the 1892 Columbian proofs (photos posted in another thread on this topic), and PCGS is still certifying 1892 Columbian proofs.

Isabella "Proof"?? Here is your proof!!!

Comments

Leave a Comment

Isabella &quot;Proof&quot;?? Here is your proof!!!

Comments

Leave a Comment

Isabella "Proof"?? Here is your proof!!!