Grading standards for Russian coins

[bobh]

It seems that collectors of Russian coins have certainly jumped on the slabbing bandwagon within the last two years or so. I remember back in early 2005 when I was just starting my Russian collection that practically the only slabbed coins offered were gold coins, usually 5 and 10 roubles of Nicholas II in MS-66 or better....Or were there always many slabs and I just didn't notice?

 

At any rate, compared to commonly accepted grading practices for some U.S. coins such as Morgan dollars, smaller coppers, etc., there don't seem to be any resources readily available for grading certain popular Russian series. For example, publications by PCGS and the ANA have gone a long way towards helping ordinary collectors distinguish between AU "slider" silver dollars, for example, and MS grades. Rick Snow used to have a very helpful, illustrated grading guide for Indian cents on his website.

 

I am sure that it is not possible to transfer the same principles 1-to-1 for grading these coins to grading Russian coins due to the varying technologies in striking, especially for coins struck before 1844. And even for coins minted between 1844 and 1917, there seem to be great differences in what is commonly considered to be XF, AU and MS grades. Sellers also tend to grossly overgrade their coins. Here is a case in point: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=250225874167 Aside from the large amount of wear which by itself would keep this coin from grading over VF in most slabs (IMHO), there is no mention of the numerous filing marks at 6 o'clock and planchet flaw around the same area on the reverse.

 

What can be done to improve this situation? Maybe we could take some common series which has coins in all grades readily available, e.g. the Romanov 1913 Tercentenary rouble, the 1877 business-strike rouble, or earlier copper such as Catherine II 5 kopeks, and set up a collection of images here on this forum for reference purposes. Slabbed coins would be helpful, but certainly wouldn't be the "absolute" reference. We could vote on the grade and publish the results here.

 

What do YOU think? Do we need this?

[grivna1726]

What do YOU think? Do we need this?

 

 

No.

 

What is needed is not grading but authentication.

 

Here is an ebay coin described as "RARE FINE 1728 RUSSIA I ROUBLE BU"

 

We could argue the merits of whether this Chinese-minted Russian coin is "BU" or "FINE" or "MS-69", but it would be of no importance or value because it is worthless (well, okay, maybe it's worth a Zimbabwean dollar).

 

Even if a coin displays absolute perfection with no detectable flaws under a scanning electron microscope, it's still worthless if it isn't genuine.

 

I agree that coins offered on ebay are often overgraded, but that's a minor problem compared to the flood of fakes there.

[bobh]

Even if a coin displays absolute perfection with no detectable flaws under a scanning electron microscope, it's still worthless if it isn't genuine.

I agree that coins offered on ebay are often overgraded, but that's a minor problem compared to the flood of fakes there.

I agree 100% ... but I was assuming that authentication would be a "given" here.

 

Unfortunately, the idea once proposed by myself (and several others, IIRC) of initiating a "fakes" forum failed due to legal considerations/reservations. I believe that a grading forum would be equally useful, once a coin has been more or less "authenticated" (at least as far as possible from images alone) and would not suffer from the same legal problems.

[Maya]

I agree 100% ... but I was assuming that authentication would be a "given" here.

 

Unfortunately, the idea once proposed by myself (and several others, IIRC) of initiating a "fakes" forum failed due to legal considerations/reservations. I believe that a grading forum would be equally useful, once a coin has been more or less "authenticated" (at least as far as possible from images alone) and would not suffer from the same legal problems.

 

It is unfortunate that the original idea of initiating a "fake" forum could not be realized.

For people like me a grading forum would be invaluable. I would not be able to contribute to it at this point but I would certainly profit from it.

[WCO]

The problem of improperly graded Russian coins while for sale becoming a major problem now, may be bigger than authentication problem. Selling non genuine coins is fraud, selling low grade problem coins as high grade more expensive once is fraud too. While many Russian collectors educate themselves to distinguish fakes, most of them have no idea about prompt grading and therefore on a regular basis overpay for not that nice coins. In terms of money I believe total loss from buying improperly graded coins is already many times more than from buying fakes. I do not know will be bobh's idea useful or not, but at least average Russian collector should learn not to buy harshly cleaned coins, coins with mounts removed, plugged and repaired, altered, artificially treated or toned, polished and sold as Proofs, etc.

 

 

Here is real example. One of my clients in Russia recently purchased two Nicholas II rubles as Proofs, spent $10,000 for the pair and was very happy about his purchase until learned that they are polished and possibly somehow else (chemically) altered regular MS rubles that were possibly in AU before alteration. $10,000 spent for two authentic but polished Rubles that worth may be $50-100 in current state of preservation. If fakes he could’ve a reason to return them, but they are authentic. No returns. Who need fakes than?

 

 

WCO

[bobh]

The problem of improperly graded Russian coins while for sale becoming a major problem now, may be bigger than authentication problem. Selling non genuine coins is fraud, selling low grade problem coins as high grade more expensive once is fraud too. While many Russian collectors educate themselves to distinguish fakes, most of them have no idea about prompt grading and therefore on a regular basis overpay for not that nice coins. In terms of money I believe total loss from buying improperly graded coins is already many times more than from buying fakes. I do not know will be bobh's idea useful or not, but at least average Russian collector should learn not to buy harshly cleaned coins, coins with mounts removed, plugged and repaired, altered, artificially treated or toned, polished and sold as Proofs, etc.

Here is real example. One of my clients in Russia recently purchased two Nicholas II rubles as Proofs, spent $10,000 for the pair and was very happy about his purchase until learned that they are polished and possibly somehow else (chemically) altered regular MS rubles that were possibly in AU before alteration. $10,000 spent for two authentic but polished Rubles that worth may be $50-100 in current state of preservation. If fakes he could’ve a reason to return them, but they are authentic. No returns. Who need fakes than?

WCO

Thank you, WCO. Of course, the problem of fake coins remains ... but improperly graded coins is also a REAL PROBLEM.

[RW Julian]

I am sure that it is not possible to transfer the same principles 1-to-1 for grading these coins to grading Russian coins due to the varying technologies in striking, especially for coins struck before 1844. And even for coins minted between 1844 and 1917, there seem to be great differences in what is commonly considered to be XF, AU and MS grades. Sellers also tend to grossly overgrade their coins. Here is a case in point: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=250225874167 Aside from the large amount of wear which by itself would keep this coin from grading over VF in most slabs (IMHO), there is no mention of the numerous filing marks at 6 o'clock and planchet flaw around the same area on the reverse.

Another from the same seller:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=250227928684

 

The seller implies that NGC gave it a grade of VF. That hardly seems likely considering

that the coin is holed and plugged. I know that "gradeflation" is alive and well in the

numismatic market today, but this "VF" grade seems over the top.

 

RWJ

[RW Julian]

Or these:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=260222300447

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=260222299576

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=250227927240

 

RWJ

[marv]

Bob, he says this is "NGC Certified," which is a highly misleading, so right away this is a fraudulent auction that Ebay should stop. The buyer would be expecting to get this coin in an NGC slab, and that would influence his/her bid. So the whole auction should be deleted. But as many times as I've complained to Ebay about frauds, I don't think they have ever done anything about them.

 

Does NGC do a full counterfeit investigation if a coin is obviously damaged and returned as a "No Grade?" I guess that is the question. The seller could claim that, in simply returning the coin, NGC has "certified" it as genuine. So, in that sense, he possibly is correct in stating that it is "NGC Certified." But it's debatable in my opinion whether this is misleading to the buyer - I think it is very.

[WCO]

I know this guy (e-bay seller) in person. And his coins represent how typical Russian collection of "rare coins" looks like in Russia. Most coins are cleaned, damaged or mounts removed. Problem free coins are uncommon. He grades them as most Russians would do, grades below VF in Russia are very uncommon and may be Fair (or Poor) coin would be "graded" as Fine. I think the problem with grading is clear once you look at his holdings. Almost all Russian auctions (even biggest) are about the same bad with grading, examples of overgraded or cleaned coins are indefinite.

 

WCO

[gxseries]

Let's say ultra high grade coins are for egoism (who wouldn't want to boast that they have the finest sample known in the world ) but putting that aside, I too am somewhat troubled over the rise of counterfeits sold online. The real problem I believe is not the counterfeits but the integrity of sellers who might or might not put in time to do the research. Some might turn it to third party graders and do their homework but I believe buyers too should know what they are buying as well.

 

I would somewhat suggest high volume coin sellers to at least take a course in learning how to grade and be as honest as possible if they cannot be bothered to send their coins for slabbing. I'm sure ANA would offer that and it would save the time and hassle of trying to understand different standards. I don't mind damaged coins etc as long as it is properly attributed and price is reasonable for such. However if it is graded and the damage is NOT mentioned, then yes, it's a real problem.

 

Least, we all can learn from forums like this

[marv]

There are as many approaches to collecting as there are collectors.

 

Some people want to be captivated by their coins; they want to look at a coin and appreciate the fine details of the engraving, the beautiful luster, or toning that eminates from the coin without the intrusion of scratches, hairlines or other detracting features. Similarly, those who appreciate fine artwork would like to see the painting in all its glorious details: the subtle design elements, the colors, etc. without having their enjoyment marred by waterstains, areas of dirt, etc. These are the folks who seek the highest quality examples of their collectibles.

 

Similarly, there are other collectors who appreciate the historical context of a collectible. For them, the state of preservation is not paramount. Their interest focuses more on the people and times that are reflected in the collectible rather than on the collectible itself. The collectible is a means to a connection with the past.

 

Then there are those for whom the pursuit of a multi-element collection is itself a goal: a date set of coins; a complete set of the paintings of Rembrandt (!!), etc., and again the state of preservation may not be that important.

 

It makes no sense for one segment of the collecting population to poo-poo the other.

 

One thing that ties these different collecting passions together, however, is the desire for genuineness. Whatever the motivation for one's collecting passion, a fake is usually spurned (however there are fake collectors).

 

This common desire for originality has spawned the third party grading business, and the desire for quality on the part of many collectors has only served to increase its importance when so many rely on non-professional sellers for their collectibles.

 

Marv Finnley

[sigistenz]

It seems that collectors of Russian coins have certainly jumped on the slabbing bandwagon within the last two years or so. I remember back in early 2005 when I was just starting my Russian collection that practically the only slabbed coins offered were gold coins, usually 5 and 10 roubles of Nicholas II in MS-66 or better....Or were there always many slabs and I just didn't notice?

 

At any rate, compared to commonly accepted grading practices for some U.S. coins such as Morgan dollars, smaller coppers, etc., there don't seem to be any resources readily available for grading certain popular Russian series. For example, publications by PCGS and the ANA have gone a long way towards helping ordinary collectors distinguish between AU "slider" silver dollars, for example, and MS grades. Rick Snow used to have a very helpful, illustrated grading guide for Indian cents on his website.

 

I am sure that it is not possible to transfer the same principles 1-to-1 for grading these coins to grading Russian coins due to the varying technologies in striking, especially for coins struck before 1844. And even for coins minted between 1844 and 1917, there seem to be great differences in what is commonly considered to be XF, AU and MS grades. Sellers also tend to grossly overgrade their coins. Here is a case in point: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=250225874167 Aside from the large amount of wear which by itself would keep this coin from grading over VF in most slabs (IMHO), there is no mention of the numerous filing marks at 6 o'clock and planchet flaw around the same area on the reverse.

 

What can be done to improve this situation? Maybe we could take some common series which has coins in all grades readily available, e.g. the Romanov 1913 Tercentenary rouble, the 1877 business-strike rouble, or earlier copper such as Catherine II 5 kopeks, and set up a collection of images here on this forum for reference purposes. Slabbed coins would be helpful, but certainly wouldn't be the "absolute" reference. We could vote on the grade and publish the results here.

 

What do YOU think? Do we need this?

The old old copper coins (1758-1848) that I collect were not machine struck. Not much care was spent striking and handling them. Die defects and planchet defects are common, sometimes charming. Some are toned evenly, most are not. Quite some were overstruck. No two of them are alike. Should the host coin still be very distinct or should the overstrike be perfect? This is to say that I am not dependent of other people's idea about the grade of a coin. I judge from the picture. If it is not sharp I ask for a better picture, also for a picture of the edge. If the coin shows only little wear and nice toning I like it. In my opinion grading was necessary in the past when dealers' price lists did not show pictures. Now all coins can be seen and judged. You asked for opinions, this is mine. Best, Sigi

[bobh]

[snip]

In my opinion grading was necessary in the past when dealers' price lists did not show pictures. Now all coins can be seen and judged. You asked for opinions, this is mine. Best, Sigi

Thank you, Sigi!

 

Although I agree with your point of view 100% from the vantage point of an experienced collector who already knows how to grade coins accurately, and according to the period in which they were struck, there is a growing number of inexperienced collectors who somehow have to learn. Unfortunately, the increasingly generous grading standards of even the top grading companies (IMHO) is creating a serious "grade inflation".

 

For example, if you saw this coin and it was not inside a slab, I doubt that you would come up with a grade better than XF-40 for this one (or perhaps in German a grade of "ss+" or "fast vorzüglich"):

1913 Romanov rouble, flat strike (NGC AU-58 ... )

 

Even granting that the flat strike Romanov roubles are, as a rule, less attractive than their embossed strike counterparts, I think this is going too far!

[bobh]

I know this guy (e-bay seller) in person. And his coins represent how typical Russian collection of "rare coins" looks like in Russia. Most coins are cleaned, damaged or mounts removed. Problem free coins are uncommon. He grades them as most Russians would do, grades below VF in Russia are very uncommon and may be Fair (or Poor) coin would be "graded" as Fine. I think the problem with grading is clear once you look at his holdings. Almost all Russian auctions (even biggest) are about the same bad with grading, examples of overgraded or cleaned coins are indefinite.

 

WCO

Thanks for your feedback, WCO!

 

Although this is true of all auctions (not just Russian auctions), I would like to say that the weekly Konros auctions seem to grade most of the coins rather well ... most offerings seem to be between VF and XF there, and while one person's VF+ could be another's XF-, I do not see the hyperbole that I see on eBay, for example. I looked at very many of their auctions specifically for the 1913 Romanov roubles about which I wrote an article in the October 2007 "Journal of the Russian Numismatic Society". It could be that different standards (or people) are responsible for grading different types of coins there; but at least for this particular series, I didn't see much reason to complain.

[bobh]

There are as many approaches to collecting as there are collectors.

 

Some people want to be captivated by their coins; they want to look at a coin and appreciate the fine details of the engraving, the beautiful luster, or toning that eminates from the coin without the intrusion of scratches, hairlines or other detracting features. Similarly, those who appreciate fine artwork would like to see the painting in all its glorious details: the subtle design elements, the colors, etc. without having their enjoyment marred by waterstains, areas of dirt, etc. These are the folks who seek the highest quality examples of their collectibles.

 

Similarly, there are other collectors who appreciate the historical context of a collectible. For them, the state of preservation is not paramount. Their interest focuses more on the people and times that are reflected in the collectible rather than on the collectible itself. The collectible is a means to a connection with the past.

 

Then there are those for whom the pursuit of a multi-element collection is itself a goal: a date set of coins; a complete set of the paintings of Rembrandt (!!), etc., and again the state of preservation may not be that important.

 

It makes no sense for one segment of the collecting population to poo-poo the other.

 

One thing that ties these different collecting passions together, however, is the desire for genuineness. Whatever the motivation for one's collecting passion, a fake is usually spurned (however there are fake collectors).

 

This common desire for originality has spawned the third party grading business, and the desire for quality on the part of many collectors has only served to increase its importance when so many rely on non-professional sellers for their collectibles.

 

Marv Finnley

Very well said ... even eloquent! Thanks, Marv.

 

Of course, I think that all collectors want to have assurance that their coins are genuine; even fake collectors will need to know the difference! In the end though, even collectors of mostly very old (and very rare) material will want to know about the grade of the coin. Some collectors don't care and will buy lower-grade coins, but they expect to pay an adequate, not inflated, price for them. If a coin in VG costs half of what the same coin in F or VF would cost, and maybe 1/4 of XF, then I need to know how to tell the difference.

[banivechi]

For pre 1900 I prefer the coins in VF and if the patina is uniform I consider the coin excellent.A circulated coin is not only a bullion of past times or a piece from an ancient collection - like the UNC's, it is a real historic artefact. It was used to buy vodka, or gun powder or it was used to pay a prostitute or a doctor, who knows? You can dream about his route over centuries. When a old coin is UNC, his history is - like their surfaces - clear. Boring.