For the Love of Low Balls..... ? 2 2

[Mike Meenderink]

Some collect the best. Others collect the worst. This post is for those that want to show the best of the worst. Post your PO1- G6 low ball coins. Value not important. PO1- G6 graded or details only (genuine grade within grades stated is also permitted) Do your worst...

[Henri Charriere]

Looks like I'm automatically excluded on a technicality: I have never laid eyes on a French 20-franc gold rooster that wasn't in Mint State condition. My theory on the ones that didn't make the grade is a collector's hope that one would. The census is replete with shattered dreams. We all know what certifications cost but with Rooster melt hovering at $350 a troy ounce, owning one is never a losing proposition. I hope someone posts something here that dispels the notion that a low-ball is worthless, or formal certification uneconomical. This promises to be a great thread!

[Mike Meenderink]

On 9/26/2023 at 1:18 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Looks like I'm automatically excluded on a technicality: I have never laid eyes on a French 20-franc gold rooster that wasn't in Mint State condition. My theory on the ones that didn't make the grade is a collector's hope that one would. The census is replete with shattered dreams. We all know what certifications cost but with Rooster melt hovering at $350 a troy ounce, owning one is never a losing proposition. I hope someone posts something here that dispels the notion that a low-ball is worthless, or formal certification uneconomical. This promises to be a great thread!

Some coins are still valuable in these low grades. Strawberry Leaf Wreath Cents, Jefferson Head Cents, Draped Busts, Small Eagle Halves among many others. In general most coins are not graded when poor conditions exist but...there is a growing market for low ball sets. I'm seeing very low grade coins being encapsulated for this exact market. Id like to see what people are collecting.   

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/26/2023 at 7:48 PM, Mike Meenderink said:

Some coins are still valuable in these low grades.... Id like to see what people are collecting.   

Me, too!

[CIII]

I present to you, the unequivical, king of the duds.  LOL

 

[Sandon]

   Okay, here's the best I can do on this topic.  This is probably the ugliest coin in my collection, a scarce 1794 "Head of '93" large cent in a PCGS "Genuine" holder. The cataloguer described this coin as having VG details, and you can read the date and lettering, but it resembles a meteor fragment perhaps more than it does a coin. I would give it a net grade of Poor to Fair. It was attributed as an S18b, although I don't know how the "b" was determined, as the older PCGS holder precludes a clear view of the edge:

Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

 

[Mike Meenderink]

NICE ! Keep them coming don't be shy lets see your best worst..  even a terrible looking coin needs affection.

[Mike Meenderink]

On 9/26/2023 at 5:14 PM, CIII said:

I present to you, the unequivical, king of the duds.  LOL

 

Hey at least it straight graded that's a plus for the coin all around. CAC is no laughing matter. That green bean can mean green on the value. Nice coin.

[Mike Meenderink]

On 9/26/2023 at 5:17 PM, Sandon said:

   Okay, here's the best I can do on this topic.  This is probably the ugliest coin in my collection, a scarce 1794 "Head of '93" large cent in a PCGS "Genuine" holder. The cataloguer described this coin as having VG details, and you can read the date and lettering, but it resembles a meteor fragment perhaps more than it does a coin. I would give it a net grade of Poor to Fair. It was attributed as an S18b, although I don't know how the "b" was determined, as the older PCGS holder precludes a clear view of the edge:

Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

 

I wouldn't call it ugly I'd call it seasoned with character. Although the devices are obscured you can still tell what it is and it has a certain patina that is pleasing. Nice holding.

[Greenstang]

As low as you can go.

1967 Canadian silver dollar certified by ICCS, 1 of 2 graded PO1

[cobymordet]

This is a 1730's GB 1/2 Penny.  Crappy as can be but a nearly 300yr old coin can't get tossed, not in the Hoarders' Code.

LOL - So, is it possible to remove the nasty on the back without killing too much of what remains below?

[Mike Meenderink]

On 9/26/2023 at 6:29 PM, Greenstang said:

As low as you can go.

1967 Canadian silver dollar certified by ICCS, 1 of 2 graded PO1

You guys don't disappoint! Nice slick!

[Mike Meenderink]

On 9/26/2023 at 7:30 PM, cobymordet said:

This is a 1730's GB 1/2 Penny.  Crappy as can be but a nearly 300yr old coin can't get tossed, not in the Hoarders' Code.

LOL - So, is it possible to remove the nasty on the back without killing too much of what remains below?

The coin is severely environmentally damaged. It is not possible to remove the black tarnish. Left as it is will be wonderful keepsake to hand down to some younger collector someday. Nice. If I had to grade it I would grade Poor Details Environmental Damage.

Edited September 27, 2023 by Mike Meenderink

[Redline68]

This is my lowest graded slabbed coin. FR02.  Head of '95.

 

[Henri Charriere]

Never knew there was a market for these.  🤔 

[Mike Meenderink]

On 9/27/2023 at 8:21 AM, Henri Charriere said:

Never knew there was a market for these.  🤔 

Many find the wear and patina on these coins appealing. I myself prefer a little patina or slight wear on some coins. The low ball is also a way for collectors to assemble larger collections at a lower cost. I know several people that love these coins.

[Mike Meenderink]

Lets see your low balls!

[ldhair]

[rrantique]

[Greenstang]

Another of my PO1 lowballs.   

CanadIan 1936 Silver dollar

[Mike Meenderink]

On 11/22/2023 at 8:39 AM, ldhair said:

If you soak this coin in mineral oil for 72 hours you will be able to gently flick off all the verdi. After soaking use a q tip and gently roll it around on the verdi or possibly a toothpick or rose thorn to gently flick it off. Try it it works. Also keep this coin away from your other coins. Coin cancer is contagious to other coins.

Edited November 24, 2023 by Mike Meenderink
spelling

[ldhair]

On 11/23/2023 at 11:38 PM, Mike Meenderink said:

If you soak this coin in mineral oil for 72 hours you will be able to gently flick off all the verdi. After soaking use a q tip and gently roll it around on the verdi or possibly a toothpick or rose thorn to gently flick it off. Try it it works. Also keep this coin away from your other coins. Coin cancer is contagious to other coins.

No. The coin is not a good choice for conservation. It is what it is. 

[Mike Meenderink]

[Mike Meenderink]

[Henri Charriere]

On 9/26/2023 at 9:29 PM, Greenstang said:

As low as you can go.

1967 Canadian silver dollar certified by ICCS, 1 of 2 graded PO1

I am afraid I am going to have to pull rank on you not because member Mike's latest bump felt more like a thump, or because I've got a few more weeks than you on the Forum as a Rising Star, but because it's taken me months to solve this little enigma.  I do not believe your example qualifies as a "low-ball." According to seemingly unwritten definition, to qualify as a L/B, the date must be legible. I supplied a TPGS before and after photos of a coin I used Brillo ®️ on to within an inch of its life, and the verdict I received was terse but polite: "From whom did you obtain this blank planchet from?"  🤣

I stake what little remains of my entire reputation (tattered and torn) experience (barely perceptible) and credibility (non-existent) on my incredible assertion and if I am wrong, I shall apologize, resign my commission forthwith, and see my way out.  To paraphrase President Nixon at his last press conference [November 2, 1962]:  "You [w]on't have Charriere to kick around anymore.] 😉 

 

 

[Greenstang]

I will accept your humble apology then Henri but no need to see your way out, I still enjoy your posts.

This coin has been certified by ICCS, Canada’s leading grader. You are right in the fact that the date should be showing but only if you cannot tell the date of the coin by some other marker. The 1967 series of coins were a one off style. The dollar had the flying goose on the reverse and you can vaguely see the outline of the back of the goose on the reverse. The other certified PO1 that I mentioned is also the same, no date but you can make out the goose.

The 1936 lowball that I posted is the same situation, no date but you can tell it is a 1936 by the crown, in 1935 the crown did not go to the rim.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Greenstang
Correct spacing

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/8/2023 at 6:18 AM, Greenstang said:

I will accept your humble apology then Henri but no need to see your way out, I still enjoy your posts.

This coin has been certified by ICCS, Canada’s leading grader. You are right in the fact that the date should be showing but only if you cannot tell the date of the coin by some other marker. The 1967 series of coins were a one off style. The dollar had the flying goose on the reverse and you can vaguely see the outline of the back of the goose on the reverse. The other certified PO1 that I mentioned is also the same, no date but you can make out the goose.

The 1936 lowball that I posted is the same situation, no date but you can tell it is a 1936 by the crown, in 1935 the crown did not go to the rim.

I wholeheartedly accept your explanation.  I am familiar with the raised dot topographical feature unique to the 1836 Canadian cent but the problem presented here is a TPGS has apparently validated your claim and formally acknowledged it.  It's tough to challenge an opinion rendered by an established TPG.

This instructively recalls a line attributed to President Lincoln:  "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."

Mine may simply be a case of sour grapes or low-baller's envy.  I could argue my coin was a post-Ike 1979 Sacagawea dollar and could not possibly be confused with any other introductory coin, but the DATE seemed to be a key consideration to at least one U.S. TPGS.  I may have to research this further but if it appears I am incorrect in my assumption, I will have no choice but to honor the commitment I made to leave unprodded of my own accord, with no parting shot.

[Greenstang]

Not to worry, I made the same assumption when I first started collecting lowballs but was told by one of the top error and variety collectors here in Canada who has written many articles and who also contributed to Charlton’s catalogue that the date is only necessary if there are different years of the same design. If it is a one year design and you can make out the design, then that is enough, the date is not necessary as you know the date. 
Quoting this off of the PCGS website “the ideal low ball coin is one that has been worn to the point that the design is worn nearly flat but is still identifiable to type and date.” 

 

[zadok]

On 12/8/2023 at 4:10 PM, Henri Charriere said:

I wholeheartedly accept your explanation.  I am familiar with the raised dot topographical feature unique to the 1836 Canadian cent but the problem presented here is a TPGS has apparently validated your claim and formally acknowledged it.  It's tough to challenge an opinion rendered by an established TPG.

This instructively recalls a line attributed to President Lincoln:  "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."

Mine may simply be a case of sour grapes or low-baller's envy.  I could argue my coin was a post-Ike 1979 Sacagawea dollar and could not possibly be confused with any other introductory coin, but the DATE seemed to be a key consideration to at least one U.S. TPGS.  I may have to research this further but if it appears I am incorrect in my assumption, I will have no choice but to honor the commitment I made to leave unprodded of my own accord, with no parting shot.

...that ship already sailed n sank....

[Mike Meenderink]