Quiz: How much this surface would score in NGC scale?

Before I get out of my mind, may I please ask others what would they think of the surface of this coin? Thanks in advance

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If a harshly cleaned coin can score 4/5 surface, I think yours can too. I think NGC is over generous in how they score strike and surface.

On non-CNG scale, someone would say your coin has signs of black deposits (probably horn silver), a significant edge crack, mild porosity, mild dings/scratches, and I think I see subtle evidence of crystalization.

It would be a 2/5 for me if I were grading it to my standards. Still a nice coin though.

 

Let's see the other side.

 

Does NGC try to apply the same surface criteria to all coin types? It really varies a lot by type; what is 'great' for an Alexandrian drachm, for instance, is very different from what is 'great' for a 1st century sestertius.

 

I voted 5/5 since ngc grading is ridiculous at times

 

I really don’t care about the number assigned.

 

One would have to see both sides.

Not all coins are regarded the same when determining surface grades. A Philip Antioch tetradrachm that is usually slightly grainy would be considered differently that an Vespasian tet that normally comes with good metal. A slightly grainy Philip can have a 5 surface, a grainy Vespasian would never be a 5 surface. A Greek fraction which is almost always a little porous is graded differently than a Roman denarius which should have good metal and smooth surfaces.
A mint state coin is graded stricter than a coin in Fine. The coin in fine is expected to have some surface issues.

Barry Murphy

 

To illustrate Barry Murphy's post see the photos below. The 1st coin is one I sold 7 years ago that has very good metal for an Antioch tet. The coin is an excellent strike but has serious porosity, mostly on the reverse. The 2nd coin is an Antioch tet of Philip II struck in poor metal, but the surfaces are exceptionally clean. Murphy's point that both sides of a coin must be judged is also important in determining surface & strike.

 

Thanks to all for votes and replies. I did not want to post the other side so as to make the coin recognisable nor to start a dispute over ngc's grading. I agree more or less with what @Sallent wrote. I have passed on this coin twice when it was offered unslabbed in 2 different auctions. When I saw it slabbed star au 5/5 5/5 I had second thoughts if I did the right thing...

 

+1

 

You did the right thing. Like I said, it is a beautiful coin, but no way would I agree with a 5/5 surface using my own subjective standards when there is a crack on the flan, and black deposits on the surfaces. I'm sure I'm in the majority here with that opinion.

 

Without seeing the obverse it’s impossible for anyone to tell what the surface grade would be. And a 5 isn’t perfect, it’s top 20% for the type and grade. Also, the reverse on this coin, being nothing more than a punch, is weighted less than the obverse. If the coin is only CEF or AU, it’s can have some issues and still be a 5 surface. If it’s mint state it would have to be much nicer to be a 5.

This is a useless exercise.

Barry Murphy

 

The surface of the other side is much better but is slightly off center and there is a little die shift. I am sending you a private message with the coin.

 

This is the obverse of the coin. It's a Bisalti oktadrachm. This coin is exceptional for one of these. Having handled 50-60 of these over the years and seen photos of maybe 100 more, the metal on this was as good as they get. No scratches, no test cuts, no porosity. The black on the back was just a bit of inconsequential horn silver. The coin was previously in a Roma sale where it was described as "An magnificent example" and a Kuenker sale where he called it "Prachtexemplar" which translates to a choice example. It was a 5 surface all day long.

 

Just for comparison as the Heritage photo is a bit over exposed, here are the Roma and Kuenker photos.

 

This is a critical point. The number does not define grade according to an absolute standard, but rather in relation to other known and registered specimens.

 

Thanks Barry, it is very helpful to understand what the grades mean and how they are determined. I sometimes buy graded ancients and knowing the meaning of the scale is a useful companion to looking at the photos provided by the seller.

John

 

The implication of the OP was that the reverse was representative of the entire coin. Seeing the obverse points out how disingenuous to this exercise really is. In my personal RR collection, I'm "notorious" for insisting on two-sided coins, even if the reverse is a boring, mundane depiction of the Dioscuri or Victory in biga. If I collected Greek though, I'd enthusiastically add this coin to my collection and never look back. This is a genuinely superb example of a type that typically is badly flawed. The "problems" on the reverse don't rise to the level of trivial. The 5 surface grade is entirely justified.

Phil Davis

 

I don't see what you find disingenuous in my posts. And since Barry made it public, I told him that I passed twice on this coin when offered by kuenker and Roma with a difference of a few months and made exactly the same hammer probably due to a hidden reserve. When I now saw the NGC grading I started questioning my decision. The only disingenuous aspect I find is the way the coin's provenance is hidden even with a different weight reported. And by the way the obverse is off center and there is a die shift but of course everything is forgiven when a dealer sells but nothing is forgiven when he buys...

 

This is a good thread and it's useful to point out how every coin has to be graded relative to its series, which makes NGC's job particularly challenging.

Mint State, ironically, doesn't mean that the state of the coin is the state it was when it left the mint (within a margin of error). And, a score of 5/5 doesn't equal 100% or perfection.

We could rank all coins relative to their theoretical perfection but that would be unfair for many types that are only known in older groups and circulated and some may never top 3/5.

Ultimately, any coin is a balance of tradeoffs for your personal preference as none are truly perfect. Personally, I also want a Bisalti octodrachm but haven't wanted to bid on this particular coin the few times it's been around because of the reverse. So, to me, it's not a matter of 5/5 or 4/5; it's just not a coin that fits my parameters. Perhaps I'll eventually find one that even grades lower but "works" for my personal set of preferences.