Explain the logic behind the decision in the Sacagawea Dollars, Proof (2000-present) set

Samets · July 14, 2026 4:18AM

I'm building this set for fun and there are a few things that are bothering me so I'm hoping someone smarter than me can explain it to me...

The 2018-S Reverse proof coin maxes out at PR70. There is no CAM/DCAM designation due to the coin being what it is.

So why is there a -2 deduction on this slot?

The All-Time Finest (All Eras) list has collections that are shown as 100% completed but in reality they are not.
Most are missing coins from about 2015 to present. How can they be marked 100% complete? I get that they may have been retired before those coins came out but the retired set is now in no way complete...

This brings me to the last point that ties #1 and #2 above... Since the All-Time Finest sets don't have the 2018-S Reverse Proof with the deduction they will always be at the top of the leaderboards for having the Weighted GPA, GPA with Top
Pop Bonuses and Set Rating that can't be beat.

Please make this make sense to me.

winesteven · July 17, 2026 12:29AM

I have no answers for you, and agree adjustments should be made in the All-Time Finest list on this set and other sets that are “series”, but in my opinion, “That’s life, and life is not always fair.”

Steve

Charles_Morgan · July 17, 2026 2:44PM

Thank you for surfacing this issue. I think you make a good point and I'll look into it.

Samets · July 20, 2026 5:07AM

@Charles_Morgan said:
Thank you for surfacing this issue. I think you make a good point and I'll look into it.

Thank you for looking into it. At the end of the day, we all want the Set Registry to be the best it can be.

Explain the logic behind the decision in the Sacagawea Dollars, Proof (2000-present) set

Comments

Categories