zadok

...all valid questions...u mite get a few insights from some of the morgan vam top 100 collectors, im sure they face some of these same questions every time they revise their top 100 list....

...u had a pet quetzal?....

...all valid questions...u mite get a few insights from some of the morgan vam top 100 collectors, im sure they face some of these same questions every time they revise their top 100 list....

...New York mint...who knew?....

...true, a significant premium n as u suspect the toning was a major contributor...but this coin is also very difficult to find with unblemished fields, the wide open spaces usually show every little mark, this is an exceptional example...plus there has been an increased interest in early 20th century italian coins lately....

This being the First of the Month, I usually undertake a review of the various compilations on the respective Set Registries, here and "there."  It appears there are six times as many collectors here, than "there." Only 2 points and change, separate my Best Current and All-Time Set rating, 65.906, "there" with the current Finest Possible Set Rating: 67.313.
I continue to urge all serious collectors of this 16-coin series to look to France and Germany for sought-after examples. The only glitch I sensed, confirmed recently by our globe-trotting ambassador, is an apparent disinclination on the part of dealers to submit coins for formal certification. In a real sense, this has put a kibosh on collecting this series. If you wish to assemble a type set within a preferred range of grades, it can be done. The availability is there. The serious collector must be prepared to GTG with photos and big bucks. All know I am not risk-averse, but am I willing to put, say, $1,250 + on the line, gambling an FDC (U.S. equivalent from MS-65 to MS-70) is specifically an MS-67 for Set Registry purposes?  No.  What are you going to do when the FDC you waited up to a month for comes back from a TPGS designated MS-64+?  Food for thought. As for me, it was one helluva learning experience. I had a good run, had a lot of fun, and now I'm done. All I have to do is defend my title, tooth and nail, for the rest of my life.  

RECONSIDERATION
Many years ago I was given a bit of advice that has held me in good stead for most of my adult working life:  "Never ask for a raise until after the boss has had lunch." I have tweaked that, as follows: Do not jump onto the Forum with a trebuchet until after you've had something to eat.
I have re-read this thread in its entirety three times and am inclined now to give Roger the benefit of the doubt. Certain phrases he has used resonate with me. I pay close attention because no member has ever claimed Roger has ever spoken with reckless abandon.
Some of his wording... "I refer to true historical pieces.... they [the Mint] did not have any better equipment.... To my skeptical mind...."  And, for me, the clincher, as excerpted at the head of this post above.  If I were on that jury as depicted in the 1957 classic, "12 Angry Men," Henry Fonda very likely would have changed my mind.  In real life, taking into consideration what Roger has written and the manner in which he wrote it, I see no agenda and no axe to grind. What I do see is a sincere attempt to objectively state the facts relying on a lifetime of research and experience framed in historical context.  Given the choice between being consistent for consistency's sake, or being truthful, I would choose the latter. If I lose my status of "Rising Star," so be it. On the matter of "Specimens" and "Special Strikes," I stand with Roger.

...AU55....

PCGS 66+

Because the coin's quality is better than conventional pieces, and there is documentation stating the unusual circumstances of its manufacture, the combination enables a distinctive identifier. Either paper or coin without the other, is just ordinary. There is a vast difference between feeding 6 planchets into a press and pulling the coins out before the drop into the receiving box, and normal production of 80+ DE per minute. (Was the 6th planchet improperly struck and discarded? We don't know -- yet.
As for so-called "1964 SMS coins" the facts are so clear and simple that these are nothing but early strikes off normal dies and not made for ANY special purpose, than it strains credibility that anyone would fall for this con. I take exactly the SAME approach - but no one has produced anything to support the "1964 SMS" claim. There is nothing at all. Such is the power of a "lying label" and poor research by those certifying such junk.

...amen, amen, amen...u have smitten the nail head...the coins in question r not anymore specimens than that collected in little jars once per year at ur dr's office...the real thing everyone should note is the inclusion of the word "legitimate" in the title, legitimized by whom?...once again arbitrary imposition by mr. obtrude...apparently coins can be specimens based on the reason they were struck as long as accompanied by a note or a hall pass...yet bona fide branch mint proof-like presentation coins obviously differentiated from normal strikings r dismissed because of the lack of annotation in the archives...laughable.... 

I tend to agree with the above. As in my example at the Sydney Mint (above) where the first six coins were documented before the closing of the Mint in 1926, they are not specimens. The first went to the Royal Mint in England, the following five to well known collectors who all but one I believe donated the coins to museums in Australia. Even on the event that the Queen fed in the blank (in England), it is not considered a specimen strike - so why should the double eagles be specimens?

...after reading all of the various comments posted so far, one would surmise that true "specimen" coins r only those that were documented as such n that if they were not struck at philadelphia mint on special planchets on certain presses n by certain set standards then all such "specimen" coins r just normal circulating coins struck at certain times n with a documented purpose...basically its not how the coin was struck its why the coin was struck n did someone write it down...everyone can come to their own conclusion on this...i for one deem it pure b******t....

...one person's historical is another's ho hum...the only thing the letter documents is the smoke that is being blown u know where...if produced as indicated then the coin's chronology is established n the only thing "special" about these particular coins is that they received "special" handling, much the same as other "branch mint proofs" n "specimen" coins...these coins n other such coins produced at all of the mints with or without "historical" accompanying letters would be more accurately described as "presentation" pieces....

...weak....

...sad n gets sadder by the day...classic text book...just sad....

...not totally relevant to ur comment but came into my mind while reading it...knowing ur obsession  with saints n my thinking that saints r not coins that r aggressively collected, however the number of registry sets do not support my premise...one thing u mite want to consider, r the owners of those sets really numismatical collectors? do they have other collections of coins or r they "one trick ponies" like another member here on the forum that collects only 14 coins?...r they collectors that have big bucks n just want to dabble in the coin collecting world n saints seem to fit what they think a coin collection should look like?...would those same collectors collect 3 cent silver pcs?...i have a couple of friends that collect rare cars n rare bourbons n scotchs n they collect only mexican gold 50 pesos just because they like the size of the coins n like to call themselves coin collectors...just a thought that crossed my mind n i know u like to use the term "serious collectors"...r these registry set saint collectors "serious collectors" or "one trick pony" collectors?...i doubt we will ever know but the question is interesting to me....

...sad n gets sadder by the day...classic text book...just sad....

...not totally relevant to ur comment but came into my mind while reading it...knowing ur obsession  with saints n my thinking that saints r not coins that r aggressively collected, however the number of registry sets do not support my premise...one thing u mite want to consider, r the owners of those sets really numismatical collectors? do they have other collections of coins or r they "one trick ponies" like another member here on the forum that collects only 14 coins?...r they collectors that have big bucks n just want to dabble in the coin collecting world n saints seem to fit what they think a coin collection should look like?...would those same collectors collect 3 cent silver pcs?...i have a couple of friends that collect rare cars n rare bourbons n scotchs n they collect only mexican gold 50 pesos just because they like the size of the coins n like to call themselves coin collectors...just a thought that crossed my mind n i know u like to use the term "serious collectors"...r these registry set saint collectors "serious collectors" or "one trick pony" collectors?...i doubt we will ever know but the question is interesting to me....

First, what a fabulous coin with accompanying documentation.
This coin reminds me of the first and last T1 & T2 ASE's, all were specially handled, documented, numbered, etc.. I don't believe any of the ASE's were given a SP designation and I'm not sure that this DE should be labeled SP either. It should be documented accordingly as the 4th coin struck and be a wonderful center piece in most collections. It was not specially struck in a manner differing from other DE's made for circulation, or with different dies, or produced for mint inspection, testing, or any other mint function that we know of, and giving this coin a SP designation may only help to broaden the inclusion of other coins graded as such. I agree that it should receive some sort of special descriptor and "presentation" piece seems fitting, along with the notation of being the 4th coin struck.  

...now u r going to have to define "mint frost"...but nicely done....

It's quite difficult to explain this without having you look at actual coins, but I'll try.
   A coin that has light "rub" from brief circulation or mishandling will show dullness instead of mint frost on the highest points of the design. This dullness may be quite hard to see when the coin is viewed "straight on" with light directly overhead. Such coins should be graded Choice AU (55-58), although they (especially pre-1837 U.S. coins) sometimes receive lower mint state grades from grading services. Coins that have never been in circulation but have been abraded by coin-to-coin contact in rolls or bags will also suffer a loss of luster on the highest points but should be shiny in those areas, not dull.  Those coins should receive uncirculated grades, though obviously affected by the abrasions, although they do not have "full luster".  
   Here is a Stacks Bowers photo of the reverse of a 1928 Peace dollar that NGC (accurately, in my opinion) graded AU 58.  Note the slight dullness at the tips of some of the eagle's wing and tail feathers, which would be more obvious if I were able to show the coin at an angle:

 
   

The following was written in reply to member RWB's assertion that the provenance of the gold found in the wreck of the S.S. Central America is unknown, and therefore of no research value...
The Willamette Meteorite some members may recall is the largest Meteorite in the United States and the 6th largest in the world.
We do not know precisely where it came from, when or where it struck the Earth -- or even when it was found!
We do know it weighs 30,000 lbs. and arrived sometime before the end of the last Ice Age.  We also know the indigenous people of the Willamette Valley, including the Confederate Tribes of the Grand Fionde Community of Oregon, demand its return.  It has been residing at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City since its arrival with the assistance of twenty horse-drawn carriages in 1906.
I believe Schliemann plundered the ruins of Troy in present-day Turkey; ISIS destroyed the tomb of Jonah in Mosul in present-day Iraq -- and the wind exists, though I cannot see it.
The lengths to which the Ship of Gold's payload was documented, in meticulous detail, with the use of grids, coordinates and cameras on an underwater submersible, was unprecedented.  The gold, the bars, personal mementoes, were all retrieved with the greatest of care.  Period publications were consulted which enabled salvagers to conclusively locate and identify the wreck and manifests were pored over to indicate what would be found, how much and where.  Many of those who died, heavily-laden with the gold they worked so hard to find, refused to empty their pockets. No wreck before or since was so carefully documented. Metallurgical experts can identify the origin of gold (and silver) from any area of the world. 
Some things you just have to accept on faith. Like the existence of Santa Claus. No one has credibly refuted his existence in centuries.