20Th Century Great Britain Crown Proofs And TPGs
7Jaguars
Posts: 7,751 ✭✭✭✭✭
I think there are some discrepencies when it comes to what is VIP proof, regular proof, and even matte proof on the issues from 1927, 1937, 1951, 1953 and 1960 - no to mention the Wreath Crowns in proof of the years 1928-1934 and 1936.
What I mean is that these standards seem to have been all over the place and not just in my humble opinion as auction results seem to also support some problems with identification here. I have been collecting these for about 25 years and have gotten them from the best of places and the worst of places and seen many coins in person, at auction, on line, eBay, etc.
Coins labelled "VIP" are supposedly of superior prep and finish versus those termed "Standard". Matte specimens are prepped by sandblasting dies as opposed to struck coins as with US gold of early 20th C.
What I can say is that I have noted the following:
- 1927 standard proof: comes with varying amounts of cameo from basically none to a fair amount of what has come to be called deep cameo, with cameo in between
1927 "VIP" does not seem to exist although I have a peculiar trial strike from the Pretoria Mint dispersal with as minted chamfered edges and a few other differences
1927 matte : seems to be only two or maybe three in private hands (one just sold for 25k plus juice this year and is NOT better than the other 66/7 vs. 63
- 1937 standard proof: comes also with varying amounts of cameo from seemingly none to cam to deep cam. The TPGs do not always get this right as there are variances in opinion as
what coin has Cam vs Deep Cam on obv. and rev. Some deep cameos IMO are no different than coins labelled "VIP". Claimed difference do not always hold up as to what is
"standard" versus "VIP"
1937 "VIP" issues seemingly scarce but see above as to overlap with Deep Cameo Standard prepped pieces, arguably better strike (more die strikes?)
1937 matte : may be the scarcest of the matte dates with only one or possibly two in private hands known
- 1951 standard proof: see comments on two above pieces. There are a few trials and specimens about with different lettering styles (often with what appear to be mint scratched/
etched numbers that have been abraded off (these will be graded as damaged by TPGs more than likely). Some may be found with edge lettering errors and omissions like
currency but I have not seen them.
One struck to test edge lettering on what I seem to recall was a M. Theresa [appearing] coin struck with Royal Mint dies at time of lettering application
1951 "VIP" issues similar to 1937 with overlap in general appearance with the cam and deep cam standard proofs, generally better strike.
1951 matte: possibly 6 or so in private hands and sim. in prep to earlier 50% silver struck issues of 1927 and 1937.
- 1953 standard proof: very similar to 1951 with the standard proofs of what is generally considered poorer quality and less distinct devices (see for example face and boot detail of QEII
riding horse on reverse. These vary up into the Cam and Deep Cam for appearance but there is overlap with quality of strike and prep with some TPG slabbed "VIP"s. A pattern
specimen went for lower 5 figures just this year with somewhat more elaborate reverse.
1953 VIP: with cam and deep cam presentation, again arguable as to which is which with some borderline cases and some that are slabbed appearing inferior to the supposed less
well prepped "Standard" proofs.
1953 matte:as above with perhaps 6-8 in private hands known
- 1960 Standard proof: see notes on '51 and '53 crowns as the standard proofs are generally not as well struck, though may occ. come cameo but unusual in deep cameo in my
experience. I have not seen patterns. There are some currency with Polished die reverse specimens out there.
1960 VIP: maybe 30-40 out there that come in cam and deep cam and seem IMO to be at last superior to the standard pieces.
Overall, there seems to be some confusion to the lay public and also the TPGs with inconsistency not only on the cam issues, but especially on the earlier Wreath crowns where I have seen numerous coins slabbed as proof that are not in my opinion & would not cop out by calling them even specimen. The standard coins of scarcer years or even less scarce years come very proof-like. I will not go there with the numerical grades as there are some graded even in the 65 & 66 range that have cheek abrasions and similar to the brow ridge above eye and indistinct details on the wreath flowers and cross surmounting the crown on reverse (particularly guilty with respect to the 1932 and 1934 years but true of the others as well). This evokes the seemingly great trouble with grading the 1902 matte proofs of both the crowns and larger 2 and 5 pound gold coins, where a grade on slab being higher does not necessarily mean a superior coin to one slabbed with a lower grade.
Most slabbed mattes in the crown series are legitimate mattes but I have seen some smaller denomination such as the 6d that are slabbed as matte and most certainly are NOT.
Anyway, before I started this rambling, will note that I caution buyers to not pay crazy prices for "VIP" coins in cameo or deep cameo versus what they may pay for cam or especially deep cameo specimens of "Standard" proofs that are well struck and of high grade ( I will note that with the 1953 that just for fun I bought a coin off ebay UK for less than 50 USD that was SUPERIOR in strike and cameo status that a recent Heritage coin thought to be VIP Deep Cam that went for 3k. Some allege that there are edge and rim qualities that separate the two but I would dispute that. My recommendation is to try to "cherrypick" superior well struck Deep Cam crowns from sets or individually that are priced like the cited example.
Finally, I will concede that while I can think I am able to ID a VIP separate from a Standard that I can not always tell, nor can the main UK dealer specialists assure that they can always tell the difference; if that is true just beware & I apologise for the late evening spin - I was just getting sick of the endless show and tell....
What I mean is that these standards seem to have been all over the place and not just in my humble opinion as auction results seem to also support some problems with identification here. I have been collecting these for about 25 years and have gotten them from the best of places and the worst of places and seen many coins in person, at auction, on line, eBay, etc.
Coins labelled "VIP" are supposedly of superior prep and finish versus those termed "Standard". Matte specimens are prepped by sandblasting dies as opposed to struck coins as with US gold of early 20th C.
What I can say is that I have noted the following:
- 1927 standard proof: comes with varying amounts of cameo from basically none to a fair amount of what has come to be called deep cameo, with cameo in between
1927 "VIP" does not seem to exist although I have a peculiar trial strike from the Pretoria Mint dispersal with as minted chamfered edges and a few other differences
1927 matte : seems to be only two or maybe three in private hands (one just sold for 25k plus juice this year and is NOT better than the other 66/7 vs. 63
- 1937 standard proof: comes also with varying amounts of cameo from seemingly none to cam to deep cam. The TPGs do not always get this right as there are variances in opinion as
what coin has Cam vs Deep Cam on obv. and rev. Some deep cameos IMO are no different than coins labelled "VIP". Claimed difference do not always hold up as to what is
"standard" versus "VIP"
1937 "VIP" issues seemingly scarce but see above as to overlap with Deep Cameo Standard prepped pieces, arguably better strike (more die strikes?)
1937 matte : may be the scarcest of the matte dates with only one or possibly two in private hands known
- 1951 standard proof: see comments on two above pieces. There are a few trials and specimens about with different lettering styles (often with what appear to be mint scratched/
etched numbers that have been abraded off (these will be graded as damaged by TPGs more than likely). Some may be found with edge lettering errors and omissions like
currency but I have not seen them.
One struck to test edge lettering on what I seem to recall was a M. Theresa [appearing] coin struck with Royal Mint dies at time of lettering application
1951 "VIP" issues similar to 1937 with overlap in general appearance with the cam and deep cam standard proofs, generally better strike.
1951 matte: possibly 6 or so in private hands and sim. in prep to earlier 50% silver struck issues of 1927 and 1937.
- 1953 standard proof: very similar to 1951 with the standard proofs of what is generally considered poorer quality and less distinct devices (see for example face and boot detail of QEII
riding horse on reverse. These vary up into the Cam and Deep Cam for appearance but there is overlap with quality of strike and prep with some TPG slabbed "VIP"s. A pattern
specimen went for lower 5 figures just this year with somewhat more elaborate reverse.
1953 VIP: with cam and deep cam presentation, again arguable as to which is which with some borderline cases and some that are slabbed appearing inferior to the supposed less
well prepped "Standard" proofs.
1953 matte:as above with perhaps 6-8 in private hands known
- 1960 Standard proof: see notes on '51 and '53 crowns as the standard proofs are generally not as well struck, though may occ. come cameo but unusual in deep cameo in my
experience. I have not seen patterns. There are some currency with Polished die reverse specimens out there.
1960 VIP: maybe 30-40 out there that come in cam and deep cam and seem IMO to be at last superior to the standard pieces.
Overall, there seems to be some confusion to the lay public and also the TPGs with inconsistency not only on the cam issues, but especially on the earlier Wreath crowns where I have seen numerous coins slabbed as proof that are not in my opinion & would not cop out by calling them even specimen. The standard coins of scarcer years or even less scarce years come very proof-like. I will not go there with the numerical grades as there are some graded even in the 65 & 66 range that have cheek abrasions and similar to the brow ridge above eye and indistinct details on the wreath flowers and cross surmounting the crown on reverse (particularly guilty with respect to the 1932 and 1934 years but true of the others as well). This evokes the seemingly great trouble with grading the 1902 matte proofs of both the crowns and larger 2 and 5 pound gold coins, where a grade on slab being higher does not necessarily mean a superior coin to one slabbed with a lower grade.
Most slabbed mattes in the crown series are legitimate mattes but I have seen some smaller denomination such as the 6d that are slabbed as matte and most certainly are NOT.
Anyway, before I started this rambling, will note that I caution buyers to not pay crazy prices for "VIP" coins in cameo or deep cameo versus what they may pay for cam or especially deep cameo specimens of "Standard" proofs that are well struck and of high grade ( I will note that with the 1953 that just for fun I bought a coin off ebay UK for less than 50 USD that was SUPERIOR in strike and cameo status that a recent Heritage coin thought to be VIP Deep Cam that went for 3k. Some allege that there are edge and rim qualities that separate the two but I would dispute that. My recommendation is to try to "cherrypick" superior well struck Deep Cam crowns from sets or individually that are priced like the cited example.
Finally, I will concede that while I can think I am able to ID a VIP separate from a Standard that I can not always tell, nor can the main UK dealer specialists assure that they can always tell the difference; if that is true just beware & I apologise for the late evening spin - I was just getting sick of the endless show and tell....
Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
Well, just Love coins, period.
Well, just Love coins, period.
0
Comments
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Interesting that even some of the so-called proof Jubilee specimens with incuse edge may also NOT be proofs and are somewhat similar to the Wreaths (not the .925 standard proofs of this year).
Analagous to the Maundy coins of Victoria & E7 (see the threepence post), I rather like to place the "proofs" into the following three categories:
- those clearly not of proof standard
- those that are borderline (Iffy)
- those that seem to be almost certainly
It seems the currency specimens do not come with satin-type strikes, and the metal content also does not help being of only 0.500 standard, and toning rather poorly. Again, IMO the TPGs appear to miss the call on some of these and when slabbed erroneously (IMO) still manage to fetch big prices at venues such as Heritage or Stacks, less commonly in the UK sales - excepting London Coins that also slab CGS...
Well, just Love coins, period.
It's tricky when you just look at just the crowns. But you can learn a lot by studying the coins found in complete VIP proof sets of this era, when available.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Of course, but it's not difficult to tell if a set is original or "put together".
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
The high mintage for currency was just over 9k, with the lows being the 1934 at just over 900 struck and the 1932 and '36 at a couple of thousand. These do not generally come with satin type typical currency strikes and the PL presentation is the general rule.
My point is that even the TPGs get their designation wrong.
Well, just Love coins, period.