Although the photographs provided by the seller are not all that good, the following item:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Peter-I-silver-polupol...1QQcmdZViewItem

appears to be from the same dies published as fake in the Russian Numismatic Society Journal 77, page 46.

RWJ

This coin is fake. It was bought on EBay about 2 years ago. Now, the "lucky" buyer is trying to get rid of it.

Why is it a fake? How can one distinguish between this "fake" and a genuine piece?

Thanks!

BTW, if somebody could send me the article mentioned by RWJ:

Russian Numismatic Society Journal 77, page 46, I would be very thankful

Here it is.

Thanks a lot, Igor! Knowledge is power (Znanie - sila) Alexey

Hi guys,

What do you think of this coin? it was sold on the last Gorny & Mosch auction (153/6001)

[attachmentid=1867]
http://www.coinarchives.com/w/lotviewer.ph...39&Lot=6001

Actually it looks very good

Too good to be true .... Novo-Fake...

I am specialized in polupoltinas of Peter I, first time I see fake coin in 2001 on my trip to Ukraine some body offer me coin .I and well know collector V.Vayshenker was agree ,this coin is fake, after 2001 I see fake coin 4 times .For references of original, you can see: I. Goodman collection 1991 lot 123, Superior sale dec.3 1999 lot 1146. You should pay attention:
1. Dots on circle close to to the edge of fake coin looks like wide line or wide dots.
2. Edge (#0) looks like oval because hardly cleaned.
And…

Rarenum, what do you think of this particular coin from the G&M sale?

I would like also to get opinion from Mr. Julian who started this topic, as well as from other collectors

Thanks!

Coin is fake, the same as from RNS.
Please see in word "polypolbtinnik" between "b" and "L" the same identical dot

Yes, I see the same dot. However, in the RNS article is stated:

"As this piece is difficult to distinguish from the GENUINE VARIETY OF THIS DATE, the collector should be extremely careful in purchasing THIS PARTICULAR DIE COMBINATION, except from well-known dealers. It is possible that these modern productions may be casts made from the GENUINE ORIGINAL"

Thus, there is a genuine die combination, as seen from the article, just this variety is being counterfeited very often.

I don't see anything wrong in this particular coin - no cast signs, no blackening. How this coin looks doesn't raise any doubts on its authenticity.

Greetings

Правда!

I also saw this expression somewhere before: Знание и мощность есть. However, I am not a native speaker, and I was wondering if it is perhaps more common to use сила instead of мощность in this context?

I am really surprised at the patina which looks quite old and genuine on the picture. I am not sure to have seen such beautiful 5 years old patina (as 2001 is report year). I wonder if the color is transmitted close to real thing; however a coin in the hand would speak more than a picture in the internet.

The coin shown from the RNS Journal is a dangerous fake because the style of the coin is so realistic. It might well be, as suggested, a pressure cast counterfeit.

I don't know if the G&M coin is real or not. But if someone is certain that it is a fake, then it would be a service to collectors to point out at least one thing about it that supports that conclusion.

If it is a pressure cast fake of a genuine coin, then it seems to me that the only way to detect it visually is to find evidence of casting. On the G&M coin, I don't see such evidence, although a much higher resolution picture would be needed to say for sure that there is no evidence of casting present.

I am unable to say for certain because I do not have high-quality photographs of a definite original. The finish on the specimen is of little value in determining authenticity because modern-day counterfeiters are getting quite good at adding different kinds of patinas. The prevalence of counterfeit 1705 quarter roubles means that any piece should be examined carefully before deciding that it is a genuine original.

RWJ

Good day, everyone.

Here is what I can add useful to the discussion. This kind is very dangerous, and many people already fallen for it. Very thorough expertise and authentication is needed to distinguish where is fake and where is authentic piece. I do heard that some coins of this kind sold even on major auctions were found to be a fake. No picture is good enough to decide!

Here is a record of authentic piece: Dm. Markov sales of 2006, lot 1149. Definitely authentic piece (no dot between "L" and "E", as was told previously).

Another piece from his 2005 sales, lot 531, also no dot, but I saw it in person and remember I did not like it much, especially surfaces. Had no idea if authentic or not, decided for myself to stay away. Counterfeits most likely are not cast copies, but minted, and this is bad.

Agreed to everyone's advise: buy with caution!

Regards,
WCO

So, what's the reason to go on with this ?


****************************************************


There's none. Therefore the topic has been heavily
editet (rude and offensive messages removed) and closed.

-Tane