1941 WLH, MS-62??????

What coin are you talking about?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Not even close to true unless you think you are the ultimate expert.

 

my thornhead - just posted a new thread on it.

 

21-S

 

There is a big difference between net grading a coin that has "problems" rather than deeming the coin a problem coin and lower grades for dipping which you admit does not make a coin a problem coin. If you have any complaint in this regard, it should be that the net graded coin deserves a details holder instead of a net grade. The problem is that most of these coins have been cleaned and it really is a matter of severity which is, wait for it, SUBJECTIVE!

Easily the most narcissistic comment I have ever read on this forum. You took a grading seminar, so you are the best? Gimmie a break. How many of the professional graders at the TPGs have had tutelage from some of the top numismatists in the world, including guys like John Albanese? My guess, plenty of them have, and all of them have seen more coins, and graded more coins than you have.

Attractive toning is the primary source of eye appeal in uncirculated coins, but even then, the absence of luster makes the color rather mundane and unimpressive. For circulated coins which have no luster, there is very little that can improve the look of the coin. I don't find dirt, grime, and terminal state toning impressive at all despite the fact that it is evidence of originality. You know what the term "wholly original" implies when used by a coin cataloger? Ugly as sin!

January 2nd, 2007.



Bought it raw for a Barber Half Dansco I was working on, had it graded before I sold it.

People who collect toned uncirculated coins also like the fact that the toning represents originality over the untoned widgets turned out by the dipping stations. That said, the majority of toning is neutral with respect to grade. It is only vivid colorful toning that really impacts eye appeal enough to affect the grade of the coin. You don't see that on circulated coins. What you are describing as eye appeal is just your personal preference.

Again, you have not demonstrated that at all. In the uncirculated grades, the TPGs DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT penalize the grade of a dipped coin unless the dipping impairs the luster of the coin. There are plenty of examples of a dipped coin and toned coin with similar surfaces and luster with the exact same grade. In the circulated grades, coins don't have luster to impair, so the coins, whether dipped or original, will have the same grade.

 

It has been discussed in one of the threads that market grading is done to reflect the value of the coin. Dipped coins have lower values than original coins.

That’s not what I said at all. Most of my education has come from studying coins in TPG slabs. Those are my standards. When coins grossly do not meet my standards for the grade, they also do not meet the TPG’s standards, so they are misgraded. Not that hard to understand.

Before I studdied slabbed coins, my instruction came from extremely experienced dealers. Studying slabs only confirmed what they said.

Your loss.

 

And that's why I am for technical grading based on measurable factors, such as luster (reflectivity), wear (surface preservation, and the amount and type of dings. Get an objective grade for that and let the collector/dealer decide which factors mean the most to them, subjectively grading them based on their own personal preference. After all, one may not care about the wear on a coin if it has luster, or reject a coin that has too many bag marks while there is little wear and good luster.

 

You know that isn't how market grading works, so stop trolling me with your little devil's advocate routine.

And just where do you think the professional graders learned how to grade, from a crackerjack box. They have more experience, better teachers, and there are three of them. Instead of assuming they are wrong, perhaps you should accept the fact that your understanding of TPG grading isn't as good as you think it is.

Why, because I don't collect what you collect, and that makes my collection some how inferior?

 

What happens when a coin has MS63 surfaces and MS66 Luster? How do you weight each attribute. Both graders could accept that the surfaces were indeed MS63 and that the luster was premium gem quality, but the grader who thinks luster is more important might grade the overall coin MS65 while the grader who defers to surface preservation may only grade it MS64. You guys need to accept that there is subjectivity inherent in the grading process, no matter how much it pains you.

 

Or you should stop assuming they are always correct.

No, but it makes your judgement overly biased and thus uncredible when it comes to circulated coins.

 

You apparently missed this thread:

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/1817-capped-bust-half-dollar-how-on-earth.325760/

 

When I disagree with the TPGs, I put my money where my mouth is; here is an example from 2012:

Guess the Assigned Grade--1924 Standing Liberty Quarter--Bonus!!!

Here is another crackout thread from 2014: Btw, look at post #26 in this 4 year old thread and what I was saying then is exactly what I just said a few posts ago in this thread.

Guess the Assigned Grade NGC 1945-D Jefferson Nickel


If you were really so good at understanding the market grading system employed by the TPGs, you would be able to use that knowledge to exploit their overgrading rather than simply bashing them for their inconsistency.

Unless the circulated coin in question is a Barber coin or a Mercury Dime, you rarely ever see me comment on a circulated coin.

 

I didn't miss that thread, it is about a circulated CBH which I have very little experience, so as I stated above, I refrained from comment.

If you would like my opinion about that coin, I would say that it has been net graded because the coin has been dipped, improperly rinsed, and developed a very questionable looking secondary toning that the TPGs can't relegate to "details" because it is so prevalent on these old coins.

 

It was lost a while back.

 

What I am saying is both grades you mention would be measured objectively and both grades could be given. Then it's up to you, the buyer, to decide, subjectively, what you value the most. Maybe a high grade on luster is more important to you than surface hits. Your choice.

 

I meant to clarify before posting. Any wear to an otherwise BU/Gem coin is damage. Whether you choose to call it acceptable or not is your choice.

I didn't change it. The Market did when it found out it couldn't keep a steady flow of business. These 5 grades AU/ 64 are blurry and they sometimes represent a lot of Money. There is only a handful of gem coins left to grade, compared to the majority on the cusp of actually being a 64 at best.
Gotta keep them submissions coming in!

 

When you try to change wear to damage, you absolutely are trying to change it. You are on an island now.

 

This thread is.....

 

I might be on that proverbial island. But it is mine.
It is preferred by me that a dealer, or a grading company calls a coin what they are. If they have been circulated or show signs of wear/damage then just grade them that way. It is my job to find them acceptable or not. I am the buyer/collector.
This type of grading works only for the ignorant (those who choose not to learn to grade). And those who are trying to make a buck or two (Dealers).

 

The part you’re on an island about is calling wear “damage” I think.