IMIS

Poland zloty 1837 PF63, on envelope brilliant proof

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=241410&lotNo=15231

To be honest, if this coin would be raw in internet auction, i never would thought that this proof.

 

 

This one still buffles me. My initial impression was that the obverse was impaired, but upon closer examination I could not find anything but light markings and minor dirt deposits consistent with the grade. No matter how I look at the coin, I am seeing two different "proof" finishes on obverse and reverse; which is beyond odd. I have seen coins with one side struck as proof and the other as proof-like (polished) but never as two different proof finishes. Not even sure if this was even possible at Warsaw mint in 1830-s.

 

 

On that Heritage link, there is a photo of an envelope where this 1827 25k were. On that was written proof. If someone has time to look, then there were more non.russian EPN coins proof but ngc graded MS.

I just thought that long ago they were not so educated to recognize proof from well struck coin:P

Could be. May be this is the reason he is donating proceeds from this sale to advance education of numismatists:)

Hi IgorS,

As you know for Proof used the same coins as for regular(business ) struck, just brushed special finished . If surfaces was removed ,for example coin accidently get in circulation or cleaned … we can’t say it is Impaired Proof coin if 20% or 10% of the proof coin remain. Possible to described Proof like surfaces remain on the edge or... But I’m not agree with description ” PROOF IMPAIRED” in conditions if surfaces was removed for last couple hundred years no by mint. For example 25 kopecks from Heritage.

It is just my opinion

Proof, like Frodo's ring can only be unmade by the fires of Mount Doom.

....To completely remove proof surfaces you need to send the coin with some high grade sand paper, or circulate it to about 'fine' grade level. Both scenarios are rather unlikely if you ask me. In any other case, you can always recognize the type of strike of a particular coin. Sometimes one cannot make a decision just by looking at pictures, you need the actual coin to ascertain.

Thank You Candidate!

I did not think Proof coin could become non Proof, but only impaired Proof.

Thank you for your opinions as I value them highly.

Got to examine the coin in person. You do need good light to 'dig' through layers of dirt and haze to get to the surfaces. I would say it was struck as proof and was mishandled in a manner that is similar to the other Russian proof in the EPN sale, which managed to get a

PF grade from NGC due to pretty well preserved reverse.

Since EPN kept these coins in pre-WWII envelopes, I would agree the coin is likely to have originated from the 1936 EHR Green sale. Therefore, proper grade should say, 'Proof: impaired by a celebrity.'

To put the last nail into the coffin, have you gentlemen handled this variety? Was it business, or proof? I am only familiar with the proof from the Goldberg auction over a decade ago.

Who is the handsome dude on the coin?

 

By photos, it does not look like proof.

Any votes for "proof"? After all, EPN in all probability had more years of experience (and perhaps weight) in numismatics than the combined graders who looked at the coin. Seems doubtful that he made such an obvious mistake...

Hello, everyone!

I am new to this forum. Saw an interesting discussion I would like to join. Rain386 mentioned an 1827 25 kop coin from the EPN collection. NGC graded this coin MS62, while EPN had it as proof. What do the esteemed members of this forum think with regards to the type of strike of this coin?