The term SLABBED

[Lazarus]

I seen this on Ebay: CERTIFIED SLABBED ANCIENT ROMAN COIN. What does SLABBED mean.

[vic9128]

slabbed means it is in a horrible plastic case.

[vic9128]

here is one

[Lazarus]

Thanks for the info. It seems this is a hot topic amoung ancient coin collectors.  I agree the coins should be held and loved but I put mine in a cardboard holder with a little cellephane window to view the coin. It is easly opened since it is only held closed by 3 staples. I feel that if that small coin survived almost 2000 years for me to clean and enjoy then I want to protect it.

[meroettger]

Why does slabbing an ancient coin seem heretical to me?  When dealing with a MS-64 carson city US silver dollar, I can understand how TOUCHING IT can decrease the value by thousands of dollars.  For such a coin, I can understand the need for a case.  But for a 2000 year-old denarius that probably has laid in the ground for 1000 years, what exactly does slabbing do?  Unless its mint grade, will a coin be damaged by touch?  With a bronze coin protected by a nice patina, damage done touching it makes even less sense.  There's a high probability it was already handled and exposed to things I can't even begin to imagine.  

Part of the reason I like ancient coins is the relatively "easy" grading system.  The {Fine, VF, EF} grades are pretty intuitive and straight-forward.  A grade of VF 20 and EF 37 simply do not make sense.  It seems a bit like someone going around an art gallery and coming up with numerical grades for the true artistic beauty of paintings.  Grading of ancient coins seems very subjective at such a level.  Its art, not science.  I say that as someone who earns a living creating scales and indices.  I think the thread cited above really makes that point.  I'll put a plastic slab around the MS-64 CC silver dollar, but I want my VF silver denarius protected by a case that allows me to periodically pull out and handle.  I guess it makes it seem alive, versus stored away in a display case.  

Mike

[ecoli]

Third party grading is useful for modern mint state coins because it somewhat protects the collectors from shady dealers who use the subjective nature of mint state modern coin grading for fraudulent financial gains, especially in mint state coins.  It works pretty well for that.  They are so popular that it is odd these days to see a mint state US modern coin of more than a couple hundred dollars not in a slab.  It also offers limited protection on full redness of copper coins (though not guaranteed) and damage to the surface of coins.

I dislike coins grading EF and below (where grading is less subjective) in slabs.  I would never buy ancient coins in slabs; I think that somehow is just wrong.  

[Joe Sermarini]

FORVM will be adding a few slabbed coins to the catalog today.  They are on consignment.   These are the first slabbed coins we have handled.  

- Slabbing ancient coins definitely does detract from the enjoyment of looking at them.  
- Slabbing does not have the same importance for ancients as it does for  modern coins because grade is not as important for ancients.  The grade on the slab does not reflect strike, centering, celator's skill, or eye appeal.  
- Slabbing does offer a guarantee of authenticity and grade.  
- Slabbing does offer some protection for a coin.
- Slabbing is not permanent if you don't want it to be.

[wolfgang336]

Joe, will you be using the grades assigned to the coins by the slabbing company? I've noticed that they can be radically off.

Evan

[Joe Sermarini]

The grades on these seem to be OK.

[Robert_Brenchley]

It wouldn't be so bad if they knew anything about ancients! Its a service designed for modern coins, used in an area where its not suited, by people who know nothing about these coins.

[wolfgang336]

It wouldn't be so bad if they knew anything about ancients! Its a service designed for modern coins, used in an area where its not suited, by people who know nothing about these coins.

Agreed. I'd be surprised if they could detect a fake ancient from an authentic one actually, so in reality, it offers no protection whatsoever.

Until someone can come up with a better idea for combating the rabid outbreak of good fakes, I'll keep on buying and getting my good coins slabbed.

Solution- Send your good coins to the BM, or Curtis, or David Sear, all of whom are a million times more reliable than ICG or PCGS.

Evan

[wolfgang336]

Slabbing provides the buyer on Ebay and the like that the coin is real, even though it's being sold from a private collector without a dealer's track record or expert opinion.

I think you may be missing the point that we're trying to make. We're not saying just that when it comes to ancient coins, that their grades tend to be a bit off, but that when it comes to authentication, these companies are quite probably completely useless. Please, somebody who owns a definite, reasonably well made fake, send it to one of these companies and we can find out what the result is. To me, buying a slabbed coin will never guarantee authenticity, grade, or even correct attribution.

Evan

[wolfgang336]

Grading ancients, for the most part, simply yes. Just search ICG on eBay and take a look at the results. Usually overgraded (significantly in my mind), however occasionally there is a coin that is correct. As for authenticity, Mr. Martin may be an expert as far modern coins go, but I don't see any credentials listed that involved ancient coins.

I'm serious about that experiment. Please, somebody who owns a Bulgarian fake, or Monneron fake, please send it to ICG and we can find out how good they are. You should be able to recover your money under they're guarantee if they give it a false positive.

I'm also kind of interested to see how talented they are with using RIC, especially when it comes to late Romans (Vol. VII mainly), which takes a bit of skill.

Evan

[Joe Sermarini]

Its out of my area, but I believe these slabbing folks set the standard for grading modern coins.  They write the books.  They grade for a living.  If you think they are wrong, I suspect you need to recalibrate your standard.  

[wolfgang336]

Its out of my area, but I believe these slabbing folks set the standard for grading modern coins.  They write the books.  They grade for a living.  If you think they are wrong, I suspect you need to recalibrate your standard.  

You are correct of course, they are undisputed experts when it comes to modern coinage, but they are a bit our of their element when it comes to ancient.

[DEAD LINK REMOVED BY ADMIN]

That doesn't quite manage to get to EF in my mind, but I'm not a Solidus expert by any stretch.

[DEAD LINK REMOVED BY ADMIN]

Even with the bad pic, I doubt this makes EF either.

I think to a certain extent, that the "it's old so it's valueable" phenomena of many coin dealers is present here, but in the form of "it's old, so we should be easier on it in regards to grade". Just my opinion anyway...

Evan

[Joe Sermarini]

They are apparently grading strictly by wear alone.  They do not appear to be considering die wear, soft strike, corrosion, etc. or eye appeal.  By wear alone, their grades are probably accurate.

Traditionally, ancient coin grading considers die wear, strike, centering, corrosion, etc.  This  traditional grading standard was essential for buying and selling ancient coins through mail without pictures.  By the grade you had a pretty good idea of the overall quality of the coin.  The trend, especially on the internet, has been toward the more modern standard of grading by wear alone.  

FORVM certainly hasn't gone as far in that trend as ICG.   I have a hard time calling an ugly coin EF even if it is uncirculated.  

The grades on the ICG slabs definitely prove that one thing.  Grading (at least the modern standard grading) is not very important for ancient coins.  Eye appeal is much more important.  

[PeterD]

I bought my first ancient in 1974 and still on occasion buy from a printed catalogue with no pictures, so I think I know what 'traditional' grading is. EF, VF etc. should only represent wear and apparent wear. Additional information, such as corrosion, centering, die and flan cracks and appearance should be mentioned separately. Even an ugly coin can be EF! Isn't beauty in the eye of the beholder?

[Julian_II]

We already had many discussions about this topic. I think grading should be enough to buy a coin without a picture (of course indicating centering, cracks, etc). But this is just an opinion. When I buy from a dealer without pictures I know how he gfrades, so I can buy it. If not, I don`t buy.
But it is pointless talking about grading, because it is very, and I mean VERY subjective. So as always if you like it, you buy it, you have the photo to decide (it is different in modern coins where grading vary the price, while in ancient coins a good VF can worth much more dollars than an UNC but with problem). As Joe said, it is really difficult to put even EF to an UNC coin if it has many problems. So again GRADING is subjective. It can help, but it isn`t that important if you have good quality photos as joe has.
My two cents.
Regards, Javier.

[PeterD]

Javier,

I agree the subject has been discussed ad nauseum but since the subject of grading has come up on the New Collector Forum, I felt I should try to put the record straight. No criticism of Joe or any others on the Forums was intended. However, I contend that 'traditional' grading if properly carried out is NOT subjective. The definitions for each grade of wear are very precise. Certainly there are some grey areas such as uneven wear.
I repeat for the new collectors, the grade EF, VF etc. should only apply to the wear or apparent wear of a coin. Other attributes, such as cracks, off-centering, eye-appeal (some of which may be subjective) can and should be listed with the grading.

Unfortunately the use of inflated grading on e-bay and elsewhere by those who have probably never even looked up the meanings of the different grades has devalued the whole system. My advice is the same as yours - go by the picture wherever you can. One thing that I do which can be useful is to make my own estimate of the grade from a picture and use it to make a comparison with Sear, where the prices are given for a particular grade. That can give a rough guide to the accuracy of the asking price.

Regards

[curtislclay]

     I bought my first ancient in 1958, and my grading standards were probably heavily influenced by those of David Sear at Seaby's in the 1960s.
     I agree with Joe:  traditional grading standards in ancients were an overall judgement of the coin's desireability, NOT just an assessment of circulation wear.
      Thus a heavily corroded disaster could be called POOR or MEDIOCRE even if it displayed no circulation wear at all, so would technically qualify as EXTREMELY FINE by the standards for modern coins, which in my understanding were ONLY LATER extended to ancients too.

[PeterD]

Curtis

Perhaps my choice of words "wear or apparent wear" was not quite right. The words used in Sear and Seaby books are "state of preservation",  so yes of course corrosion where it affects the detail of the coin would affect the grade. I guess these books were the de facto standard for grading as they were the ones that listed grades. The most recent book I have that defines grades is the Seaby's 1997 'Coins of England and the UK' (which of course includes ancient and modern coins). That specifically only mentions wear, nothing else. The overall grade of a coin as I understand it consists of the preservation (EF, VF etc.) plus a description of it's good or bad points. The result should make the coin self-evidently desirable or not. If that is what you mean by 'traditional grading' then I agree. I appreciate people had and still have their own ideas on grading, but to be of any use, everyone needs to stick to one standard.

Regarding the later extension of grading standards from modern coins, all I can say is I have the 1952 version of the above book (a Christmas present that year!) which says in the introduction "Except for the more modern coins the prices are for pieces in 'VF' state of preservation".

Regards

[curtislclay]

Peter,
    I would agree that in traditional grading the grade indeed applies mainly to state of preservation, independent of important additional factors which are then mentioned separately, such as centering, flan size, flan cracks, weak or sharp strike, hole or edge filing, etc.
Regards,
Curtis

[wolfgang336]

Compared to modern coinage, yes there are more fakes in Classical Numismatics.

Yes, slabbing is taboo in this particular area of coin collecting for many reasons. The point being discussed now, is authenticity. If a slabbing company did indeed have a recognized expert on their staff in charge of authenticating ancients, we would not be having this discussion. The fact remains however that I have yet to see any names of said experts, and so, I refuse to believe that companies such as ICG have the expertise to authenticate an ancient coin with the level of accuracy collectors find necessary for large purchases.

Evan

[Jochen]

Hi!

There is a point not yet discussed: How could a collector like me grade a coin so precise as EF40 or EF 41? I think that will be not possible and so it will be the beginning of a grading monopol! Am I right with that?

Regards

[vic9128]

How does one become an expert in grading ancient coins? How is this person "recognized"?

[Robert_Brenchley]

[Lazarus]

[curtislclay]

[Robert_Brenchley]

[Varangian]

[cogito]

[bpmurphy]