Guess the Grade 1941-S Walking Liberty Half

The star designation does not simply mean outstanding eye appeal. It is used for eye appeal related to toned coins and for coins that show PL or Cameo on one side only for untoned coins.

The link below is a thread I wrote in 2009 on the subject.

The "Other" NGC Star Designation

The link below is NGC's own policy that details the rules for the star designation for untoned coins written in 2002.

Understanding and Recognizing a Star

Luster and Strike are not factors in the star designation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

While I agree with all of that (and posted my own thread on it...linked below), I have seen NGC be quite casual with the star in the past few years. There are some real head scratches getting the star (as well as some deserving coins that didn’t get the star).

With the Walker, I believe NGC thought it was almost PL (maybe with one side being stronger than the other). My definition (not that of NGC) for the coin is semi-PL.

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/post-your-ngc-stars-and-a-little-history.308504/

And NGC does say:
"NGC assigns its trademarked Star Designation to coins with exceptional eye appeal for their assigned grade"

 

By the way, luster is a factor:

“NGC assigns its trademarked Star Designation to coins with exceptional eye appeal for their assigned grade.

Eye appeal is the most subjective attribute of a coin, but there are many standards shared by numismatists. Exceptional eye appeal may include attributes such as vibrant, colorful toning; intense luster;or, in the case of Proof coins, especially strong cameo contrast.”

https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/

 

64-star, huh? Maybe the rainbow toned ‘41 Walker is now in an AU-55 slab

 

It is what it is people.........

 

Anything is possible I guess

 

No, luster is not a factor. The four elements of grading are surface preservation, luster, strike, and eye appeal. The star designation is solely awarded based on eye appeal. That is why they made explicit rules for untoned coins.

I have seen only a handful of untoned coins that have the star designation and don't have PL or DMPL contrast on one side. And I would group all of those coins in with this one, a grading error. And most of the untoned star error coins are SLQs and Washington Quarters.

 

Alright then, if it IS a grading error could you send it back in for reconsideration and get some sort of a payout if they deemed it NOT worthy of a star?? Just asking because i have no idea really. If it were PCGS i wouldnt even bother to ask, they would no doubt call it a mechanical error, re-label it, send it back and call it a day.

 

So is the NGC page wrong when they say “intense luster” or are they talking about something else?

In the part that I quoted from NGC regarding stars, they say a star is based on eye appeal and then define eye appeal-including the part about luster.

 

If you are going to quote the NGC website, then quote the NGC website. Here is what is says:

The way I read this is that the luster is simply a qualifier, not something that is being rewarded. In other words, if a Morgan Dollar had a PL obverse, but the reverse was flat muted luster, it would still not qualify for the star designation even though the criteria listed below had been met.

The problem is that NGC has awarded coins with the star designation that don't meet the requirements set forth on their own website. This leads to confusion about the already incredibly subjective application of the star and severely lessens its value, IMO.

 

63

 

I disagree. While less common, I have seen and owned semi-PL (not just one sided PL) coins in NGC star holders. This is especially true for series where full PL coins are scarce or outright rare. I say that as a former PL collector. NGC has never given firm guidance on what qualifies for a star for most coins.


P.S. You omitted one important sentence from your quote:

In applying star designations to applicable proof coins, all of the above criteria apply for toned coins. Untoned coins, however, must meet one of the additional criteria outlined below to qualify:

• They display cameo or ultra cameo contrast on the obverse only.
• Coins that do not qualify for cameo but which display cameo contrast on both the obverse and reverse that falls just short of NGC's minimum standard for cameo may receive a star. (Coins that display only a subtle contrast will not receive a star or a cameo designation.)
• They qualify for the cameo designation and, in addition, have an ultra cameo obverse.
• They qualify for the ultra cameo designation and, in addition, exhibit exceptionally intense contrast between devices and fields on both the obverse and reverse that exceeds by a generous margin that of the normal ultra cameo standard.

 

Just because you don't understand why it received a star, does not mean it was done in error. Subjectivity is just that, some will agree with it and others won't. It's the opinion of those giving the star that matter. If you disagree with it, don't buy it.

 

That is the whole point! The star designation was designed to reward EXCEPTIONAL eye appeal. If I, or anybody else is left wondering why the coin got a star, then the coin doesn’t deserve the designation.

And my collection is heavily invested in the star designation so coins like this one hurt the credibility of the star and devalue other coins with a star, so when I see a coin with a star that doesn’t deserve it, it will not keep quiet.

Maybe you can photograph this coin to illuminate what I am obviously not seeing. Your photos are phenomenal.

 

Considering the views that NGC took. It has exceptional eye appeal no matter the definition of a star.

 

I have an idea. If we can crowdfund the amount I spent on this Walker, I’ll crack it out of the holder and run a giveaway for the raw coin. That way we’ll keep the star designation credible.

 

64

 

Note: the grade was revealed on page 2

 

I would love an opportunity to photograph this coin. I bet it's surfaces are out incredibly brilliant with traces of die polishing lines. I appreciate the compliment and thank you.

I have seen a couple of Morgan Dollars with a star designation that in my opinion did not deserve it. There was no toning, no PL or DMPL obverse or reverses let alone semi-PL. The coin was simply white. Now I could not look at it in hand as they were only images, so that is all I could go on. Obviously a couple of people at NGC thought it deserved a star for who know's what reason.

 

I have a solution-
Just send me the coin and i will tell you if its deserving of the star designation. I am the all-mighty & powerful coin whisperer. If it is deemed to be accurate i will whisper sweet nothings into Lady Libertys ear and send her back all brand new with a smile on her face.