Points and type sets posted by JTO

[CSJournals-migration]

Is a 1909-S VDB red equal to a 1958-D?

 

Sometimes I don't understand the scoring system. At first look it is almost a dollar per point system or maybe it is based on rarity? But by what standard, mintage bears little to no resemblance to population (severely overestimates in an un-equal distribution) or the population reports (which over estimate due to re-submissions). The score seem vaguely reasonable but I have a pet peeve. In the type set it seems you should get more points for say.... a 1909-S VDB as your wheat cent than a 1958-D. so I went the route of a matte proof. 24 points for a 1909-S VDB MS 63 RD was tough to look at. Just one guys perspective...

 

See more journals by JTO

[coinsbygary]

There is a rational that I know you won't necessarily agree with, and its that type sets are more heavily weighted by grade than they are of rarity and value. In a type set you won't care if the coin is a key coin or not, just that it is a highly graded coin because types encompass a wide series of dates and types. On the other hand the series registry focuses on all the aspects of the coin, grade, rarity, and value.

 

Where you have the same coin in different sets, your total accumulated points will reflect that coin at it's highest value in your sets.

 

In the end we can complain about points, I certainly have, but if the standard is applied equally to everyone, what difference does it make? BTW, the coin you have pictured is a very nice coin and I'll bet you get more points for it in a Lincoln Cent series than 24. In fact an 09-S VDB RD in MS-63 gets 2823 points. The 09 RD proof in 63 gets 1619 points.

Best wishes

Gary

[coin928]

There was much debate over this issue in the forums under the topic Type Set Scores versus Date Scores . The thread began nearly two years ago on July 26, 2011 and was last active on August 1, 2012. I also had many private communications with NGC prior to that and my very first journal entry ( Be careful what you ask for... ) ended with my thoughts on the topic.

 

After all was said and done, it was my understanding that every coin would receive the same point score regardless of which set it participated in, including type sets. This is now the case in all of the US/Philippine series and type sets, so it surprises me a little that this policy has not been implemented across the board. That seemed to be the desire of the majority of collectors at the time.

 

I still do not agree with the stated policy, and I think that (as in this case) coins should receive point values commensurate with the role they play in any given set. In my opinion, an MS63RD 1909-S VDB is equivalent to a MS63RD 1958-D when it appears in a type set. It is, of course, worth much more when it appears in most other sets.

 

Nice coin, by the way. I would much prefer it to a '58-D regardless of the points it received!

[Lucky One]

Is a 1909-S VDB red equal to a 1958-D?

 

Sometimes I don't understand the scoring system. At first look it is almost a dollar per point system or maybe it is based on rarity? But by what standard, mintage bears little to no resemblance to population (severely overestimates in an un-equal distribution) or the population reports (which over estimate due to re-submissions). The score seem vaguely reasonable but I have a pet peeve. In the type set it seems you should get more points for say.... a 1909-S VDB as your wheat cent than a 1958-D. so I went the route of a matte proof. 24 points for a 1909-S VDB MS 63 RD was tough to look at. Just one guys perspective...

 

See more journals by JTO

hey JTO- some info just in case you weren't aware- the population guides are updated for resubmissions. In fact, when PCGS first started up operations, there were so many resubmissions that they paid you a dollar per insert just so they could keep the guide accurate. I agree with you that there are a LOT of resubmitted coins reflected in present populations but you have to accept that and research your favorite series so you have a good feel for each coin's true scarcity or outright rarity. For me, scarcity is defined as any popular US numismatic issue that today has less than a couple hundred coins slabbed in all grades combined, and rarity as less than a hundred known to exist, period. We all have our standards and it really depends on the series we collect, but in reality, 'rare coins' is an oxymoron simply because there are thousands or tens of thousands of most rare coins in existence, and as with the Morgan dollars and double eagles, some have hundreds of thousands of each issue remaining. I agree also that your 09-S VDB should get it's full value in ANY set, but I also see why they don't- your score would be skewed against all the others who built their type sets conventionally, with the most common but attractive pieces they could find. Depends how you look at it I guess. My problem with the registry sets on NGC is the way they force you to either collect the varieties they deem necessary or take the hit in points vs another collector with deeper pockets. A set in my humble opinion is one of each mint from each date for the length of issue, but I guess that is for another discussion...

[RWB]

"Sometimes I don't understand the scoring system."

 

That's to be expected. The scoring system is based on point scoring in full-contact cricket played on an Australian-rules rugby pitch. The system is augmented by subtracting or multiplying by the cosin of Einstein's original cosmological constant and the price of lemons in Mumbai during the monsoon season.