1917 Halfcrown

[ozjohn 552]

Two 1917 halfcrowns I have. The top one is a NGC MS 62 while the other is an ungraded coin I  brought from Michael Coins before it closed when I was in London a few years ago. I think the ungraded example is a better coin than the NGC graded one and welcome any comments as I am trying to improve my grading skills. The top coin is the NGC MS 62 graded coin while the bottom coin is the ungraded coin brought from Michael Coins.  Thanking you in advance for any replies

Edited April 24, 2018 by ozjohn
typo

[VickySilver 775]

Yes, I'll vote for the second as well - the first looks to have the lustre "washed out" by dipping perhaps overzealously. This with the caveat that it is hard to picture slabbed coins. I have an absolutely gorgeous NGC64+ 1907 half crown and can not for the life of me get a decent picture in slab.

[zookeeperz 470]

I'll say they are possibly the same grade purely on the marker points of P of pense and I of honi on reverse. The slabbed coin those two letters are just a tad higher in definition . It is the first point on these half crowns to wear first. And also we are looking at a slab which will possibly detract from an overall look. But I wouldn't pick 2 over 1  because of the fore mentioned points. Still nice coin though

 

[Stuntman 264]

The second coin looks to have a sharper strike on the obverse, to my eyes - but it might just be because it's difficult to photograph the first coin through the slab.

Both very nice!

[Sword 1,330]

I think the question is how much does weak strike affect the grade. In the traditional strict grading, I think it would be a great deal. I think Peck once made the point that in Spink, the definition of Fine for milled coinage is "a coin that exhibits considerable wear to the raised surfaces of the design, either through circulation, or damage perhaps due to faulty striking." 

Nowadays, many people are happy to call a weak strike coin UNC if it is lustrous and the loss of details is not due to wear. One can argue that weak strike is part of the minting process and does not affect the grade. 

I have taken a stronger interest in George V coins lately and have decided not to get involve in these sort of arguments. Hence, I just won't buy a weak strike coin if I can help it. So for me I would certainly prefer your second coin.

This is my example of 1917 crown. I brought it quite recently from Colin Cooke. 

 

Like yours, there is slight weakness at the top left of the shield which has almost merged with the crown. I did debate with myself if I should wait for a better struck example. However, I decided that since most 1917 are weak in that area and I might have to wait quite a long time to get fully struck example. 

 

Edited April 24, 2018 by Sword

[ozjohn 552]

Very nice coin Sword and interesting comments regarding strike quality of coins.  I examined the NGC MS 62 coin again with a eye glass and it appears the obverse area on the side of the King's head above the beard is weakly struck as is the corresponding area on the reverse where the top RHS of the shield is located. It is obvious that minting issues are not initially considered by NGC during their grading  of process although it probably effects their final assessment of awarding MS 61 etc. as I think they  grade first the rough grade F,VF,XF or MS  ie  Fine  25% of design remaining, Very Fine 50% etc.  to Mint State 100% of the design present then they micro grade based on strike quality, lustfre etc.    What a difficult series to grade as wear and strike quality are very difficult to tell apart. One criteria that I use is to examine the milling for wear as that for the most part is unaffected by the minting also many George V coins seem to have a thin ridge around the edge of the milling which is the highest point of the coin and will wear first. Coins that have the milling and the ridge I describe intact but seem to be worn are probably weakly struck and not worn. On the coin of concern the milling is hidden by the slab.

 

Edited April 25, 2018 by ozjohn
Extra text.

[VickySilver 775]

Yes, I think NGC often gives a "technically" influenced grade. In other words, if a coin is perfect to how it left the die and no handling or bagging that it will rate highly even if softly struck.

I'm in the boat where I think presentation that includes originality, and lack of damage are important, but that if G has flat hair & details and shield is blah flat that I will pass. I took some time about 15 years ago or so to assemble the best set I could 1911-1936 and was very choosy in that way. I took the lot and set them up in a Capitol holder which I thought (and still do) was quite impressive. Not rare coins, but pleasant to look at.

[Peckris 579]

On 24 April 2018 at 10:07 PM, Sword said:

 

 

Like yours, there is slight weakness at the top left of the shield which has almost merged with the crown. I did debate with myself if I should wait for a better struck example. However, I decided that since most 1917 are weak in that area and I might have to wait quite a long time to get fully struck example. 

 

Make that "Most George V first reverse halfcrowns". That denomination was the least affected by reverse ghosting, but the high profile bust does cause a regular slight weakness where the shield meets the crown. The guiding principle for GV is hair detail, which is excellent on yours. No point looking for a better one.

[ozjohn 552]

A PCGS MS 64 1917 halfcrown listed on Ebay  for comparison. https://www.ebay.com/itm/GR-BRITAIN-George-V-1917-AR-Halfcrown-PCGS-MS64-SCBC-4011-ESC-758/173275070299?hash=item2857ffbf5b:g:vHgAAOSwqMRa1gVK  Sword IMO I think your example is much better than the PCGS example listed on Ebay and I would be very happy to own a coin like the one you have .The PCGS TPG has put the "wear" on the ear, side of head and top of shield in the Ebay listing down to a weak strike. 

Edited April 26, 2018 by ozjohn
typo

[Sword 1,330]

8 hours ago, Peckris said:

Make that "Most George V first reverse halfcrowns". That denomination was the least affected by reverse ghosting, but the high profile bust does cause a regular slight weakness where the shield meets the crown. The guiding principle for GV is hair detail, which is excellent on yours. No point looking for a better one.

Thanks Peck. I think general weakness in that area of the reverse does make the series more interesting. It is a nice (long term) challenge to find an UNC example fully struck on both sides.

6 hours ago, ozjohn said:

A PCGS MS 64 1917 halfcrown listed on Ebay  for comparison. https://www.ebay.com/itm/GR-BRITAIN-George-V-1917-AR-Halfcrown-PCGS-MS64-SCBC-4011-ESC-758/173275070299?hash=item2857ffbf5b:g:vHgAAOSwqMRa1gVK  Sword IMO I think your example is much better than the PCGS example listed on Ebay and I would be very happy to own a coin like the one you have .The PCGS TPG has put the "wear" on the ear, side of head and top of shield in the Ebay listing down to a weak strike. 

Yes, I do prefer my example to this one. This is the type of coin I would not consider buying regardless of its technical grade. It is very difficult to say if the flat ear and end of mustache is due to wear or weak striking. The reverse has a lot of weaknesses too. 

[Peckris 579]

19 hours ago, ozjohn said:

A PCGS MS 64 1917 halfcrown listed on Ebay  for comparison. https://www.ebay.com/itm/GR-BRITAIN-George-V-1917-AR-Halfcrown-PCGS-MS64-SCBC-4011-ESC-758/173275070299?hash=item2857ffbf5b:g:vHgAAOSwqMRa1gVK  Sword IMO I think your example is much better than the PCGS example listed on Ebay and I would be very happy to own a coin like the one you have .The PCGS TPG has put the "wear" on the ear, side of head and top of shield in the Ebay listing down to a weak strike. 

Yes, that's poor. The leopard heads are pretty flat, the ear and moustache are not good, and the hair isn't that crisp either. $356?  They're having a laugh..

[Rob 3,001]

2 hours ago, Peckris said:

Yes, that's poor. The leopard heads are pretty flat, the ear and moustache are not good, and the hair isn't that crisp either. $356?  They're having a laugh..

That'll be $56 for the coin and $300 for the label, then.

[youliveyoulean 24]

That 1917 halfcrown graded MS64 by PCGS is a complete joke. Nearly every British coin I have examined being sold by Atlas numismatics would appear to be considerably overgraded (I have no bone to pick with the seller having never met him or purchased one of his coins) relative to others of similar grades.

It sums up everything that is wrong with TPGs. They are so stupid! You cannot have one set of grading standards for your biggest customers and a different set for the rest. The inconsistency will be the death of the business model eventually as it essentially relies on a confidence trick. When it becomes all too clear to buyers that not all coins are graded equal, the emperor has no clothes!

Back on topic, hard to compare the two coins as they appear to be taken with light sources at different angles. The bottom coin appears to rife with verdigris.

Re Sword:- "there is slight weakness at the top left of the shield which has almost merged with the crown. I did debate with myself if I should wait for a better struck example. However, I decided that since most 1917 are weak in that area and I might have to wait quite a long time to get fully struck example."

This is certainly true for the 1917 halfcrowns in particular.

 

 

 

[ozjohn 552]

Verdigris? I think  need to study your chemistry my friend. Verdigris sffects Cu not Ag! 

[IanB 175]

Verdigris can appear on silver due to the copper content used in its manufacture. The lower the silver content the higher the copper content. 

[ozjohn 552]

Unlikely on sterling silver 0.925 pure of which of which coin in question is made from. As an aside I have never seen verdigris present on . 500 fine debased British silver either. 

[IanB 175]

Then they were probably stored and looked after correctly. If they were not then there is a possibility that verdigris could occur.

[ozjohn 552]

What is being stored correctly?  If you mean being left in a bag for 20 years and then seeing the light of day without any verdigris forming  on both 0.925 and .500 silver coins ? Like I say I find your argument in convincing.

[PWA 1967 1,841]

17 minutes ago, ozjohn said:

What is being stored correctly?  If you mean being left in a bag for 20 years and then seeing the light of day without any verdigris forming  on both 0.925 and .500 silver coins ? Like I say I find your argument in convincing.

If you go into the LCA website previous results and just type in verdigris there are lots of silver coins pictured and described with it on .

Its definately not impossible for silver coins to have it ,although i am led to believe its much easier to remove as does not get into the metal as it can with a higher content copper coin.

Edited April 27, 2018 by PWA 1967

[ozjohn 552]

As I say in my experiance I have never seen it on any coins I have. In any case the original charge was veridigris on the coins in question in this thread. IMO verdigris is completely absent from all the coins discussed in this thread and is NOT an issue to the discussion.

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Sorry and you are correct and is NOT an issue with the discussion 

 

[ozjohn 552]

No need to be sorry. A discussion on the possibility of verdigris affecting silver coins is a perfectly valid discussion. All I can add is in my experiance  I have never seen it.

Edited April 27, 2018 by ozjohn

[VickySilver 775]

As far as a joke, I wouldn't say so. Please see my previous notes - on many occasions, if not most, the TPGs grade according to state of preservation with respect to how the coins left the dies. In other words, if softly struck but without wear or distracting marks, a relatively high grade may be achieved.

One great example would be from this same date:  the 1917 sixpence. I have seen even highly graded specimens that are flat on  lion's snout and not well struck details in G's beard and hair even make the exalted MS67 level. A coin such as this, and a recent ?Heritage auction had TWO at that level is IMO inferior to what otherwise would be an MS65 but exceptionally well struck.

[Sword 1,330]

3 hours ago, VickySilver said:

I have seen even highly graded specimens that are flat on  lion's snout and not well struck details in G's beard and hair even make the exalted MS67 level. A coin such as this, and a recent ?Heritage auction had TWO at that level is IMO inferior to what otherwise would be an MS65 but exceptionally well struck.

This highlights the point that desirability is not dependent solely on technical grading. 

[youliveyoulean 24]

Sorry ozjohn, I can assure you verdigris is very common on these .925 silver halfcrowns ( I hold most George V halfcrowns in uncirculated grades so feel qualified to comment) and unfortunately your coin number 2 appears to be riddled with it. Without seeing the coin in hand, It could just be dirt but I very much doubt it. If you have a loupe, take a close look under magnification.

If you are comparing grades that TPGs use, then verdigris to such an extent certainly does impact the grading.