1917 Half "Presentation Piece" Anyone?

http://coins.ha.com/common/auction/...p?SaleNo=175

Lot# 6424 ANA Signature Sale 1997

Sold for $7820.00 including BP to a bidder on the floor.

Here is the text for reference and if you don't have a HA account.

1917 Presentation Piece MS 64 ANACS. This extraordinary coin was once part of a five-piece proof or "presentation" set of 1917 coins. The set surfaced at the Jack Tar Show in 1976, being jointly owned at that time by David Hall and Joel Rettew. The set was broken up at that show. The cent was a one-sided proof with the matte finish only on the obverse. Bill Nagle handled the Buffalo nickel. And J.H. Kline ended up with the quarter. Unfortunately, no one seems to remember what happened to the dime.
This coin is accompanied by three letters of opinion regarding its status as a specially struck piece. The letters are from Bill Fivaz, Joel Rettew, and Bruce Fox.
This half (and the set it came from) were part of a large East Coast collection that was known for years as the The Great Eastern Collection. It is not known (to us) where the set originated prior to its placement in The Great Eastern Collection. Its appearance at the Jack Tar Show caused quite a sensation, and while two other 1917 sets are rumored to exist, the coins from this set are the least controversial proofs from this year. The coins are alluded to several times on page 219 of Walter Breen's proof Encyclopedia (who was also at the show, examined, and verified their proof status).
When this coin is placed side-by-side with a regular business strike half from 1917, several obvious differences are immediately apparent and several others are more subtle, yet no less important, upon close examination. First, the overall striking details are superior in all areas. Close examination of Liberty's head and hand, the eagle's breast and legs, the stars on the flag, and the designer's initials reveal details which simply are not present or as fully brought up on normal 1917 halves. The rim is wide and even around both sides. Before the coin was encapsulated Bruce Fox examined the rim and noticed a distinct difference in "crispness and sharpness making them (the reeds) appear extremely exact and distinct." The striking process itself appears to differ with this coin. Again, to quote Bruce Fox, "proofs made in this era weren't struck as they were in normal business strike operations related to machine pressure and striking force. Most were more slowly struck causing a squeezing scenario which more gradually increases pressure letting the metal flow more uniformly and distinctly into the design. This causes sharp contours and lack of rounded detail." The inference, of course, being that an intentional effort was made to create a proof specimen, not a mass-produced business strike. The surfaces overall give a different impression of the chemistry used to create the coin. It was Walter Breen's belief that the proofs made in 1916 and 1917 were of the sandblast type rather than the acid dip or pickling type that are generally referred to as matte proofs. The sandblast proof generates a process which results in a granular surface with soft luster. The marks on this coin (several small ones on the head of Liberty and a few tiny ones scattered on the lower obverse) are inconsistent with a coin that has spent time in a bag or roll. Such pieces display microscopic marks caused by contact with other coins, a.k.a. "bagmarks." The abrasions on this piece may be dismissed as mishandling by previous owners through the years.
This extraordinary coin also has a moderate overlay of finely speckled golden-rose and lilac patina. While we have seen other so-called proofs and/or presentation pieces over the years, this is truly a coin that "carries its own credentials." We invite inspection by anyone interested in clandestinely made proofs as well as specialists in this ever-popular series.

Westcoin, Thank you so much for all that information. Very interesting. I can't thank you enough for taking the time to send it, along with the links. I have been looking at a coin that the seller is implying is one of the 2 "undiscovered" coins. Now I can try to tell for sure if his coin is indeed one of these presentation proof pieces. After reading the info and die characteristics I am leaning towards it not being one but will go back and compare with this info. People like you truly make this site a treasure trove of information. Thanks again for sharing, Bob

Walter Breen, in his later years, would allegedly write a note about any coin saying pretty much whatever the owner wanted if the price was right. Just a sidenote.