Monster Grade

I’m just well aware that they’re better graders than the overwhelming majority of people especially people that just look at a picture online and try and definitely grade

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Here is the coin photo'd by Heritage,
https://coins.ha.com/itm/a/1254-7308.s
Heritage makes it a little clearer what is left over from an incomplete strike and contact marks.

 

The obverse is nice. Monticello is very poorly struck and there is damage on the right side of the steps.
Is that the same coin? HA photo looks better.

 

Huh, that's weird. A different camera picked up all the same marks..... almost like they are really there on the coin. Weird.

 

Like I said most of that was barely visible. If you want to grade at 20x or more sure they jump out but we don’t grade at that magnification

 

I am learning to photo myself, and for the sake of argument. One thing that hasn't been pointed out. Mole hills can be made into mountains if the photographer doesn't get the setting and light correct. Is that what happened here, I don't think so. the marks are present in both sets of photo's. I count four or five distracting marks on the obv. of the coin.

 

66 at best...weak strike...just worth the plastic in that grade. Very poor detail on rev...agree it's well over graded.

 

I wouldn't buy this one as a 67+ from what I can see but everything baseball says is true with regards to trying to grade from pictures. The fact is even if you are a world class grader without having the coin in hand you may make a perfectly educated guess based on what you see and be off 2 points either direction.

Look no further than any GTG thread. Even with great pictures very good graders here are way off all the time.

 

Is that what a 67+ Jefferson should look like? A number of marks in a focal area combined with a VERY weak strike?
@Lehigh96 we could need one more pro opinion

Below a picture of an NGC MS66 I recently purchased:


Now try to convince me above coin should grade almost 2 points higher...?

 

Strike in my opinion doesn't affect a grade until 68 or better. A 66 and up is all about luster and contact marks.

 

You just posted like 10 percent of the coins at 30x magnification of higher, there is NO comparison that can be made with such little information.

You are showing a perfect example of one of the traps of grading from pictures though. You’re blowing up small parts to huge magnifications that aren’t what coins are graded at and micrograding as a way to disprove a grade. That just isn’t how coins are graded

 

My old mom, one of the most derisive persons to ever breathe air used that old saying a lot. I saw a bumper sticker on the back of an old farm truck in the corn country of west central Illinois that addressed a slightly similar issue. It read, "If you want to complain about farmers, don't talk with your mouths full."

Still, I understand that there are lines drawn at this and similar forums about slabbed and raw coins. Given that my own collecting skills and experience are not the equal of many members here, I would choose to remain impartial on this subject. I will say that there are a number of individuals here who want to bang the drum for counterfeit coins a bit more than necessary. It's almost like asking one's self if every coin he/she has purchased is bogus... why collect at all? It's a lot like the frenzy going on in national news these days.

 

This is not a set that I collect...so I'm not an expert but it does seem to be overgraded to me.

As others have said, there are quite a few small marks on the coin...especially on the reverse. I'd be curious to see the coin in hand to see that offset these marks. Is the luster and eye appeal exceptional? Do the photos make the marks look far worse than they actually are? Is it both?

Because of the price this coin is going to realize...I'd pass on it without seeing it in hand. Just to many concerns for me. In hand it might be gorgeous...but the photos don't convince me of that.

 

I know that coins aren’t graded at such a magnification level, the picture merely shows all the marks and also how weakly struck the coin is - compared to another Jefferson Nickel. If both were graded MS66, I’d have kept my mouth shut. But MS67+...really?

 

Really? I am not at home and can’t have a look at my ANA grading guide, but that’s what I’ve found online:

http://www.fsjeffersonnickels.com/gradingstandards.html

ANA MS67 - Has full original luster and sharp strike for date and mint.

PCGS MS-67 - A superb-quality coin! Any abrasions are extremely light and do not detract from the coin’s beauty in any way. The strike is —> extremely sharp (or full) <— and the luster is outstanding.

 

Yes you can certainly spin it that way.

 

That’s the point though. If you have to magnify it that much to show it it just doesn’t matter from a grading standpoint. The heritage pictures are pretty close to the magnification it would be graded at

 

Right, it must be the professional graders who saw the coins in person that are wrong not the people who just saw a set of pictures on the internet

 

I recall posting a thread on an MS67 Jefferson here a while ago. That i thought was way overgraded. I learned alot from that thread. Most notably, that all those marks and nicks you see on the obverse arent actually post strike. They were there BEFORE the coin was struck, and the extra hard metal, (nickel)combined with striking pressure doesnt always get rid of those planchet flaws. Supposedly the TPGs can tell the difference & dont penalize or down grade for those nicks, since they were on the planchet pre-strike. Im guessing that is what we got heeya. I dont agree with this practice, and maybe someone else can explain this alot better than what i just did. @Lehigh96 ?