Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Is it Fair for TPG services to assign a MS grade through Net/Market grading
It was a rude awakening for me when my MS 64 PCGS SLQ received a Not CAC grade from CAC. JA kindly explained to me that the coin had the slightest friction from a little circulation or mishandling, seen as discoloration on the knee. Otherwise my coin has great luster and very clean surfaces. I feel the only solution is the AU 59 grade as proposed by others, for exceptional coins that have only the slightest friction but otherwise have the attributes of a higher MS grade coin. Time to get rid of Net Grading for so called pretender MS coins. Thankfully we have CAC to protect us from these mistakes. Thanks Feel free to agree or disagree, waiting for Mark Felds usual criticism Lol.
My coin
My coin
Comments
That's EXACTLY what the AU-58 grade was when it was "included" in the grading scale. Furthermore at that time, AU-58 coins did not have any wear in the fields - only on the high points. Think of a coin such as yours. Some knowledgeable folks say AU-58 while others say MS-64. Full luster except for a change of color on the high point where the luster on its original surface is impaired. Unfortunately, over the next forty-eight years, things changed as any strict "Grading Standard" no longer exists and Many AU's are graded low MS. LOL, there is no such thing (non-scientific non-repeatable process); and if there ever is, I'll bet none of us posting now will be alive.
Here is another bet. You let me pick out five of the "best" numismatists (JA would be one [Big Suck Up
PS Usually the "rub" on these coins is a little higher up than your circle.
Not CAC (or even submitted) I just liked the color contrast.
Here is another bet. You let me pick out five of the "best" numismatists (JA would be one [Big Suck Up
PS Usually the "rub" on these coins is a little higher up than your circle.
Your proposed bet about five of the “best” graders “and we would all agree 100% on the condition and preservation of ANY COIN (it’s ACTUAL GRADE” is laughable. I don’t know of a single expert who’d be anywhere close to agreeing with you.
And there’s absolutely no way that the grading companies would start grading all of the current MS graded coins as AU59.
"Your proposed bet about five of the “best” graders “and we would all agree 100% on the condition and preservation of ANY COIN (it’s ACTUAL GRADE” is laughable. I don’t know of a single expert who’d be anywhere close to agreeing with you."
NUTS! You are a knowledgeable professional. I think you are selling me and your peers very short. I find that I agree with your grading opinions on forums (even from images) most of the time.
However, if you cannot look at a flatly struck coin (in hand) and judge its surface by its originality and only the amount of friction wear it received after it was struck, perhaps a few decades looking at them as just another piece of common, worthless metal (you have no attachment to) under magnification with fluorescent light would change your opinion.
Remember, no net grading or market grading in the group! That is the only way we could reach agreement. We would not be putting a value on the coin!
I've personally witnessed how a group of some of the top numismatists and dealers in the country could not simply grade an "obviously solid Photo-Grade XF" early Large cent! Their grades ranged from AU to VF due to both net and commercial influences!!!!!! Is there any wonder you think my bet is laughable? You are one of them - a very knowledgeable numismatist who could also be in the group of "five" if you left your market grading influences out of the room.
I hope you’re not going to claim that.
I think you you didn’t fully address the topic at hand. Remember, my post was in response to the below.
“ Here is another bet. You let me pick out five of the "best" numismatists (JA would be one [Big Suck Up
I should enjoy reading your opinion. What do you think about my post? Do you agree with Mark? Do you think that JA, David Hall, Mark Feld, JD, Laura, and Rick could not sit down together and agree that an Indian cent was a F-12?
"I see a post of yours from 1:07 PM Central time, to which I replied. I was speaking of mint state and Proof coins. Grades for circulated examples would typically be much easier to agree upon. However, even for them 100% would still be laughable."
Personally, I find that grading circulated coins is much harder. IMHO, the parameters for grading MS coins are fairly well established and easy to teach. IMO, the reason professional graders might disagree on the grade of a MS coin (Example: all MS-65's are not the same) comes down to these things and more:
1. Color.
2. Strike.
3. Eye Appeal.
4. Rarity.
5. Value.
6. Magnification.
7. Lighting.
8. Personal involvement.
9. Experience of grader.
All of these except 6, 7, and 9 would be eliminated from consideration when the five would be asked to evaluate the CONDITION of the totally original (non-problem) round lump of metal from the day it was struck. Therefore, Only its surface quality would be judged by its marks and remaining design.
Allow me to illustrate my "bet" using a mythical example. Let's imagine a Liberty $20 "wonder coin" of exceptional beauty. If we were to get a group of experts together and ask them to evaluate the coin using 6,7,and 9 alone, we might hear something like this that all could agree on.
The coin has full blazing original mint luster except for some dull, flat spots along the hair line and a tiny patch on the cheek due to SLIDING friction against another coin, There are many small hits on its surface including a few noticeable hits on open areas of the relief and field. Although it is original it is not in the MS condition the way it left the die.
Bingo, based on what they can actually see and put into words we have total agreement. The coin is not MS. AU-58 is its actual grade.
Now, back to the real word using the imaginary coin in my example above:
We turn the five professionals loose using 1-9 and anything else:
Marks = 63
Hairlines = 63
Strike = full.
Luster = Exceptional 67+
Surface = a very slight rub on the high points hidden by toning.
Color = Stunning rainbow starburst.
Eye appeal = Absolutely breathtaking - even worthy of a "unique special name."
Value = "Skies the limit."
Grade = 68+++ finest known example!
Grade = 67 * finest known example!
Grade = 68 finest known example!
No more agreement. Over the next few months...
Send it to top TPGS #1 Grade MS-67+
Send it to TPGS #2 (it belongs in our holder) Grade MS-68
Send it back to TPGS #1 (no, it belongs in our holder) Grade MS-68+
No agreement. Nevertheless. When put into a room together any experienced numismatist could look at that piece of gold with a 7X glass and if they tipped it and rotated it under good light they would be able to tell us everything they saw on the coin just as the "experts" using 6,7, and 9. alone did. That is its actual condition of preservation. Some call that its "Technical grade" which has no relation to its VALUE, EYE APPEAL, or anything being done in the modern coin market EXCEPT for problem coins with "Details" grades.
I have faith in my peers. I think most of them can see everything there is to see on a coin when they tip and rotate it under magnification in a good light. It must be like an auction cataloguer.
IMO, the trick to professional COMMERCIAL GRADING is to know the things you see on a coin THAT CAN BE IGNORED.
In the case of mint state and Proof coins, do you think that professional graders are capable of agreeing
“100% on the condition of preservation of ANY COIN (its ACTUAL grade)”?
Did JA actually say that your quarter wasn’t a “true uncirculated” coin? If so, you didn’t make that clear in your opening post.
You wrote:
“JA kindly explained to me that the coin had the slightest friction from a little circulation or mishandling, seen as discoloration on the knee.”
I doubt that he believes all MS60-67 NGC/PCGS Standing Liberty quarters and Saints with the slightest friction or discoloration on Liberty’s knee are circulated.
“JA kindly explained to me that the coin had the slightest friction from a little circulation or mishandling, seen as discoloration on the
knee.”
I think a reasonable person can infer from his comment that JA is saying my coin is not truly uncirculated.
On the Slq/Saint issue I wonder if he will pass any coin with the slightest friction if it is graded Ms 67 or higher. Everything is subjective as often stated about grading so I guess there are gray areas on the subject