the nicks on the chin and behind the ear arre very distracting making me want to give it a 66 but it definitely has the qualities of a 67.
With hits like that on the head it absolutely amazes me how anybody could think that coin could ever on ts best day be graded higher than 64
I see worse singular hits on 65's. Coin appears to have clean as silk fields with excellent luster (67+). I held it back for the 3 moderate hits on and around Abe's face to a 65, then +1.....
I have watched Doug's grading. I really don't think he counts luster for much - or at least not nearly as much as the TPG's.
There is far more to grading a coin than just luster. Is it important ? Yes, but so is everything else. And to ignore everything else is a mistake. Any way you want to look at it.
"Ignore" or simply "value less"? I suppose my point, admittedly not well articulated, was luster counts more (according to the TPGs) when you get gem and gem+ grades. That, and RLM's photos tend to exaggerate the appearance of ticks and taps. Wanna bet PCGS graded it above 65?
Not much would surprise me anymore Mike, not when it comes to how the TPGs grade anymore. I'll readily agree, and always have, that luster is the single most important grading criteria. But a coin can have the best luster in the world, and if it's got 3 hits the size of those in a prime focal area, plus more besides in other areas, on a coin the size of a cent - it's got no damn business being graded above 64. And according to you, grade and value are the same thing. Or as I believe you put it, coins are not graded, they are priced. Well buddy, that one's priced wrong if it says anything over 64 on the slab edit - and just to remind folks here, never once in all of rlm's threads like this have I ever guessed what the TPG said the coin was. My grades are always what I think the grade ought to be.