I am completely stumped on this MS-67+ Washington Quarter

I looked up the actual auction, https://coins.ha.com/itm/washington...6-3488.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515, the full slab photo the wing doesn't look that bad. The breast hit still kinda jumps a bit, but my opinion of it became much more favorable after seeing the full slab pic closer to real size

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I see what you mean. I always feel people are more often than not, overly critical of coins online using these blown up expanded images. For me, my first grade given in 5 seconds usually holds w/ 5X mag. I still think 66 is pushing it and 67 is just over-graded. It's still a beauty imo.

 

While I agree that the images I posted are very magnified, they still present the problems that would be easily seen under a 3x loupe under a grading lamp. Those problems are right in main focal areas and should not be missed by a professional grader. Heritage did not do any favors for the seller by including the high magnification images.

 

Why would NGC give it a bump to 65 for color. I thought that is what the * is for. Besides, that color sucks.

Chris

 

Why? I kind of like horsehockey, bullblintzes and fugly.

Chris

 

Look at a couple 1951-D MS67's at CoinFacts - it's an issue PCGS actually has good coins for - to see what a real 67 looks like at high magnification. The coin presented here isn't worth $50.

 

Seems overgraded to me, too, especially compared to first 3 67+ coins listed at the bottom of the Heritage Auction page for this coin, they look virtually pristine.

 

"TypeCoin971793, posted: "And this is why grading companies should not exist."

Your profile says you are twenty and you may be a real cracker-jack numismatist already; however, you have a lot to learn.

The next time you are around some older men that were numismatists possibly even before your parents were born, ask them what the hobby was like in the 50's and 60's. You will get a better perspective of how far we've come and the value of grading services for folks less informed than you may be.

"It allows people with more money than brains to enter the hobby and ruin the fun for everyone else. It is no longer a hobby to appreciate the history and beauty of coins. It is just a game to see who has the highest number."

This coin should have NO EFFECT on any collector's fun, or the appreciation of history and beauty of coins. In fact, some may think the coin IS beautiful. The only downside I can think of is the continual escalation of coin prices that has been going on with each passing decade. Past history tells me that this coin is just part of something that would have happened anyway!

Lehigh96, posted: "I think the coin is gorgeous and I'm sure the luster is off the charts. That said, there are too many small ticks on the focal areas to warrant MS67+. For me this is a low end MS67."

The coin is very pretty. It has been commercially graded by several TPG's and then got a CAC sticker! These folks have put a value on it. Technically, and according to the ANA's grading guide, a coin with aa dozen obvious obverse hits, and two dozen on the reverse (estimates) should only be an MS-63!

"What I don't understand is the hyperbolic vitriol being thrown at this coin in this thread."

It's easy, most of us are wanabe professional TPG's or have their ability and knowledge at the least. That's why we are very quick to look for errors they have made. IMO, this is a big one and deserves to be discussed. I'll bet if that coin were cracked and submitted to PCGS it would be downgraded and still get a CAC sticker (not gold).

In the 1970's, the first TPGS (INSAB) issued their grading opinion on a separate card from the authentication certificate photo because the Director believed grading was subjective. He welcomed the fact that the ANA started grading several months later as everyone was entitled to a second opinion.


jtlee321, posted: "While I agree that the images I posted are very magnified, they still present the problems that would be easily seen under a 3x loupe under a grading lamp. Those problems are right in main focal areas and should not be missed by a professional grader. Heritage did not do any favors for the seller by including the high magnification images."

IMO, Heritage posted magnified images to C their A. Any YN at Summer Seminar could tell the coin was over-graded by a mile. Those kids have sharp eyes. While the marks on that coin are not in the fields, a few are too large to be missed.

"cpm9ball, posted: "Why would NGC give it a bump to 65 for color. I thought that is what the * is for. Besides, that color sucks."

Color can raise a grade. It can also rate a * or +. In this case there grading error was maxed out, thus the *. Color is a personal thing. I think I side with your opinion on this one; however, that coin must be awesome to the naked eye - remember, these coins are graded w/o any magnification.

 

It doesn't much matter whether TPGs overgrade coins "all the time" or "almost never". As long as there's a chance for a coin to end up in a slab a point or two (or three?) above its station, there's incentive for people to resubmit, and keep resubmitting, until it "makes" the grade.

Eventually, the typical slabbed coin will be overgraded. Until then, the TPGs profit from their own inconsistency. In fact, they may continue to profit from it even after that point is reached.

In fact, some might say this has already happened...

 

Since I'm no expert at grading, I can't say why it graded a 67+. Not sure I would give it a 67 with all the dings on the reverse but despite the splotches I love the toning and there appears to be plenty of luster.

 

-jeffB, posted: "It doesn't much matter whether TPGs overgrade coins "all the time" or "almost never". As long as there's a chance for a coin to end up in a slab a point or two (or three?) above its station, there's incentive for people to resubmit, and keep resubmitting, until it "makes" the grade."

Yes, that's the game the deep-pockets play.

"Eventually, the typical slabbed coin will be overgraded."

This is where you crashed and burned ... I disagree and the evidence out in the market backs me up.
If anything can be learned since 1986, slabs tend to be UNDER-GRADED as time passes.

 

So, why, given that re-submission carries the chance of an upgrade? Does the grading fee impose enough friction to prevent this from running out of control? Or are the under-graded ones mostly examples where a bump of a level or two doesn't add significant value?

 

Wow. I wonder who submitted it. What a lucky guy. Or was it just luck?

 

My point is that the TPG graded the coin MS67+, and then CAC stickered the coin at MS67. How many professional opinions does it take to overcome the grading mastery of Cointalk members who grade from photos?

And I'm willing to bet that that coin never goes below MS66 no matter how many times it is graded. Everyone here can see the surface ticks, so we should assume that the professional graders saw them as well. With that assumption, we know that it wasn't the surfaces that account for the grade, rather the luster and eye appeal of this coin must be off the charts. I think that there are too many people who think that minor marks are grade limiting. In my experience, that isn't how the TPGs work.

 

Why don't you bid on it? That's a $1000+ coin in the NGC Price Guide. That would be a great acquisition for you. You got CAC behind it. It's a sure investment!

MS67+ CAC my horse's ass, Lehigh!

 

Eewwww.

 

-jeffB, askes: "So, why, given that re-submission carries the chance of an upgrade? Does the grading fee impose enough friction to prevent this from running out of control? Or are the under-graded ones mostly examples where a bump of a level or two doesn't add significant value?"

Looks like you answered your own question.

Lehigh96, posted: "My point is that the TPG graded the coin MS67+, and then CAC stickered the coin at MS67. How many professional opinions does it take to overcome the grading mastery of Cointalk members who grade from photos?"

The best thing about TPGS and CAC (?) is when they render an opinion (that is guaranteed) that opinion is CHECKED by tens of thousands of eyes. It is CONFIRMED OR NOT. Those eyes can study a coin for more than eight seconds AND use magnification. The fact that Heritage CTA on this one speaks volumes! That coin is over graded. Period.

"And I'm willing to bet that that coin never goes below MS66 no matter how many times it is graded. Everyone here can see the surface ticks, so we should assume that the professional graders saw them as well. With that assumption, we know that it wasn't the surfaces that account for the grade, rather the luster and eye appeal of this coin must be off the charts. I think that there are too many people who think that minor marks are grade limiting. In my experience, that isn't how the TPGs work."

I agree that the coin must be "off-the-charts." Both charts. An eye-appealing blazer that's possibly worth 67 money and a way over graded MS-64! I disagree that the graders saw all the marks; however, I don't think CAC missed anything. Go figure.

 

I have found that CAC values originality over all else. In other words, if it's never been touched, dipped, altered, or messed with in any way, then 75% of the battle is won.

 

Stipulated, that's how the TPG's work. The argument is against the idea that minor marks aren't grade limiting, since that's kinda how grading works....