ChrisInJesup

Why..... after looking at certain proof coins..... is there such a point difference between back-2-back coins under certain situations?

I have a 1958 Wheat Penny & 1959 Memorial Penny in PF68 Red, but their point values are extreme. The 58' is 5201 points and the 59' is 81 points?!?!?!

NGC coin value difference between the two is $10...… but their point difference is way off the charts! WHY!?!?

Can someone explain why this is so different in many other cases in this nature?

9 hours ago, Revenant said:

Those are not major awards. Those are category awards. They get certificates - sometimes just PDF copies of them. Those are given im every category every year. The "major awards" are the ones that get plaques and $500 grading certificates.

Best in Category goes to the highest ranked set in each category every year. That's just how it works.

I don't think its reasonable to penalize someone for not upgrading a set that is winning it's category - assuming you're even able to do so.

That explains it, makes more sense now. I just see that "Best in Category" posted on some of these collections with 5, 10, 12 awards and I wondered. Now I have a better picture.

On 12/30/2019 at 8:27 AM, Revenant said:

I'm not aware of any cases where 1 set won the same major award twice and it's rare for a set to win 2 of any kind - I think there have been one or two times where a set got something like "Most Creative" one year and "Most Informative," another year. So I think you're worried about something that doesn't happen anyway.

Let me give you a couple links to see what I'm saying. I'm only using these links only as an example as I enjoy their viewing their collections.....

Larry Shapiro's Peace Dollar collection won 2015 & 2016 for "Best in Category":

https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/182830/

Pam's Peace Date (better known as evilwoman13... congrats for her collection being shown at the 2020 FUN) won 2017 & 2018 of the same:
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/199268/

There are others sets that have won 4, 5, 6 majors in a row.... and they are on the top with the same type of coins they started in some of those years. 

I'm saying some did improve their set (they deserve the chance win for doing improvements) and some didn't improve it much or none at all..... and they still won.

Again, this is just my 2C of thought!

I had another epiphany about what I said earlier. As I was admiring some of the award winner's coins.... it struck me odd WHY would you award the same thing to someone that showed NO IMPROVEMENT in their collection?!? Isn't "improving" one's collection a goal of a Numismatic? I think someone that won the "Best Modern Set" for example.... makes an improvement in their set before receiving that award again. Otherwise, I just buy the "BEST" coins and win! And if that person doesn't improve their set, another set get an OPPORTUNITY to win that prize!!

Just more food for thought!

I disagree with the article on it's influence of collecting. It truly doesn't promote collecting when having these registries, but rather alienate those that can never compete with those with the finest choice of coin because those collectors having deep pockets. Why should there be competition?!? It should be more of admiration of someones top end collection and strive to have something close or better.... but enjoy what you have accomplished to get where you are.

I spend about $1000 a year getting the best coins I can and keep my Silver Eagle collection up to date (another story). Always improving my collection when an opportunity presents itself. However, I don't get much in coinage due to the inflationary costs of mid to high end coins because of this high end competition. The major dealers know this too and inflate even the most modern coin just to make a buck. Some call it free market (no such thing), Some say supply and demand (more price push up with known demand) or just plain GREED. I can't even buy a raw coin without having it at hand, but I'm supposed to rely on pictures online. I know if its not verifiable online, I don't buy.

I use registries to help me track my basic collections. I enjoy my coins for the artistic work that went into the dies that produce them. I've held some coins that were over 100+ years old, just to know what my Great Great Grand Dad held. he probably thought it was a fortune holding those $1 dollar coins. Or what my parents spent for a soda or malt. Many times I listen to my Mom talking about spending 40C for a burger and malt in the 50s. Today, I can remember gas being a quarter a gallon when I was 6 years old. it's these coins from those eras that make me collect, to make me think... how far things have changed.

So what is my point you ask? My point is how can we make these registries work for everyone and promote coin collecting?! As I said on another post, let's recognize those that improved their registries to start. Reward them for IMPROVING their collection through the registries. The whole idea, IMHO, is to get others into collecting (and inadvertently, preserving) history. Don't make new collectors compete with those that have deep pockets, but recognize them for improving and bettering their collection.

Amateur (HAM) Radio (another hobby/technical experimentation of mine) had the same problem, but they changed and adapted. Why can't the numismatic world do the same? I think registries do a detriment to the hobby when a 13 year old may see others look at the collection as inferior, but was built with heart and spirit. I think change is needed nd I hope many of you think the same!

Thanks for letting me write my diatribe!!.

I think this award program is such an incentive and motivator to collect. As I look at the awards and look at the winners of some of the bigger awards, I find that a group of collectors are left out.... the ones that can't buy a $3000 coin just get it in the set. For an example.... "Best In Category" award always seems to go to the ones that can afford the best coins of the set type mentioned, that's fine as that is THE best in category.

I try not to complain much, but I like the one called "Best New Set" as a good start for us who don't have deep pockets. Because of the rules, I think that one should go to those that break 50% every year.... not the year they started. And that is where I'd like to see something added!

Be nice to see another award developed for IMPROVING their collection set because maybe.... just maybe.... they get the "Best in Category" as well because they not only showed improvement, but their collection reached those of that same caliber. Needs a 20% improvement in score for example.

I'm a NOOB when it comes to collecting coins, but I'm a fast learner. I can consider myself an expert on Morgans, Peace and American Silver Eagles. But I'm learning more each day about earlier and today's coins. Such a great art of engraving to learn from.

I know one set I have is eligible for one of the awards, but I know it's a long shot. But knowing that award is available is why I loaded up my almost entire collection. And if I knew that December 6th was the cut-off, I would have worked harder entering my coins.

Having fun collecting and competing is what I like.... so think about what I said about starting another award for "Best in Improvement"  for a set to fire up collectors like myself!!