1917 proof lincoln

[JIM F.]

I hope an expert can clear something up for me.  According to Seymour Wampum's publication, there were 3 proof 1917 Lincoln cents, as well as 5c, 10c, 25c, and 50c struck in proof dated 1917.  Have such claims been disproven?  Thanks.  Here is a photo of what is claimed to be a 1917 proof Lincoln with a COA by Breen.

 

[MarkFeld]

None have been attributed as such by a major grading company. And, while you can't really disprove a negative (such as that there aren't any), their existence hasn't been proven. I doubt that will change. 

[Just Bob]

"Seymour Wampum"?

[JIM F.]

2 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

"Seymour Wampum"?

Here is a link to the publication.

http://seymourwampum.com/1916-proofs--1917-proof-set-transitional-designs.html

 

[WoodenJefferson]

25 minutes ago, jimbucks said:

Here is a link to the publication.

http://seymourwampum.com/1916-proofs--1917-proof-set-transitional-designs.html

 

What grading service is TNNC? I get the feeling that Mr. Wampum and Biddles Bank know one another.

[JIM F.]

5 minutes ago, WoodenJefferson said:

What grading service is TNNC? I get the feeling that Mr. Wampum and Biddles Bank know one another.

Let me google that for you.  TNNC likely=(The) National Numismatic Collection.

http://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/subjects/coins-currency-and-medals

 

[WoodenJefferson]

Glad to find out it's not NNC

[Just Bob]

53 minutes ago, jimbucks said:

Here is a link to the publication.

http://seymourwampum.com/1916-proofs--1917-proof-set-transitional-designs.html

 

Thanks for that link. Looks like this will be some interesting reading.

[Conder101]

19 hours ago, WoodenJefferson said:

What grading service is TNNC?

Not a grading service, TNNC = The National Numismatic Collection i.e. The Smithsonian Collection.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

On 5/14/2018 at 3:31 PM, MarkFeld said:

None have been attributed as such by a major grading company. And, while you can't really disprove a negative (such as that there aren't any), their existence hasn't been proven. I doubt that will change. 

I believe we had this discussion, in 2014 and 2015.

[MarkFeld]

6 minutes ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

I believe we had this discussion, in 2014 and 2015.

John, I don't doubt it. And we will probably have it again .  Either way, I'd be shocked but elated if a convincing Proof turned up.

[JIM F.]

Has anyone from the grading services examined the so-called proof at the Smithsonian, and if not, why not?

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

17 hours ago, jimbucks said:

Has anyone from the grading services examined the so-called proof at the Smithsonian, and if not, why not?

IIRC, a few board members from ATS visited and viewed this piece, among others, CA. 2010/11. There was no consensus at all that it was a Proof.

[RWB]

There are no "proof" 1917 US coins in the Smithsonian or anywhere else. I've examined the SI coins.

[WoodenJefferson]

...well, that shoots that theory down.

[LINCOLNMAN]

Hard to imagine that any 17's will be fully accepted absent positive contemporary documentation. Whoever decided on the matte proof concept back in the day certainly created a lot of mischief, and a bit of fun. 

[Just Bob]

28 minutes ago, WoodenJefferson said:

...well, that shoots that theory down.

Nice shot, Woody!