Guess the TPG grade 1826 CBHD

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Just to add to the discussion further and learn some more, according to Halperin's "How to Grade US Coins" the obverse high points are the hair beneath LIB on the band, the cheek, and the "skin" of the bust area. I don't see any wear on the cheek, but I do see what appears to be darkness/wear of metal on the breast and on a lock below I on the hairband. Why would the coin have wear on these areas, as well as those cited above, and not on the cheek? I have no idea. I look forward to seeing those additional photos on Tuesday to clear up my confusion! Obviously my guess of AU58 is nowhere near the assigned grade (somehow I will have to go on living) but I think I agree with everyone else that this is a gorgeous kick a88 bust half!

 

I will not be baited. Besides, you might actually be right on this one. CBH sliders are commonly market graded to MS grades.

 

PCGS guide to grading says this is probably the toughest series to grade. I'll guess 67 on the slab as guide says there are very few found disturbance free. I'll guess 65 for myself because you stated that this was the next "gem" you are the custodian for.
On a side note: In the pic it looks like there is a 2 between the 5 and 0 on the rev.(partway under the 0 and up a little) and a 0 to the right of the actual 0. My mind playing tricks on me again, anyone else see this?

 

OK here is the slab- It was graded by PCGS as MS65 -

 

Well I just dont see the other coins the way you do - They all appear to have lesser quality of strike & more tiny surface chatter than the original coin.But since Im looking at the pictures I could also be wrong

The lighting in the 1st pictures most likely affected your view of the coin as it did put too much brightness on ceertain points.

Amazing how a coin in hand can be SO different. If PCGS is off on this one I feel it may only be by a point at the most. It really is a super coin that IMO & PCGS's is nowhere near AU.

 

Just a little point, if it looks good enough to be AU 58 and it was UNC, it would jump to 64 or higher. If it had enough marks to grade ms 62 then in AU it would be 53 or 55. That is my understanding of the scale. basically (if all the AU numbers were used) 50 t0 59 would relate to 60 to 69 in mint state, the difference being a break in the luster.

(adding) I should say not litterally point for point, more like AU 53 for ms 60-63, au 55 for ms 64-64 and Au 58 for ms 66-67, and my guess should have probably been higher for ms or lower for AU.

 

I think that some are (again) confusing toning with wear -- and it is almost always difficult to distinguish between the two using only a single photo to make the determination, IMO...Mike

 

p.s. still think it looks like a 64 because of the hit/stain on the left obverse field.

 

Well - to settle this he should just send it to me. I will be an impartial judge.

 

Someone or something touched only the high-points causing it to tone in these areas. It also could be wear/stacking friction (which would tend to bolster your argument although the TPGs interpret this type of wear quite differently that you seem to), or this could simply be an artifact of the photo -- but any of these could cause what we're seeing....Mike

 

p.s. the likely reason for such an AU-and-above population is due to the price of these coins -- they don't become viable to slab unless they are in AU or above. That's the same reason you don't see AU 1964-present Lincoln cents slabbed either, and it has nothing, IMO, to do with grading standards.

 

p.p.s. common sense would dictate that we trust the two people who have actually seen the coin -- PCGS and Bud.

 

I would have guessed an MS 64, but it is an "A" coin so seeing that it got an MS65 is no surprise. Very well struck, lusterous and original toned coins like this are very nice and exceedingly more rare than the dipped coins that are being peddled.

 

thanks for the grading info, vipergts, I clearly need remedial ed!

 

Ms-61

 

Wear & die states are a very fine line in this series. I think in many cases what looks to be wear is really the flattening of the die over time. In order to distinguish between the two one needs to take the whole coin into account, including the die variety, and the the die state.

Certain years in various die states were made with flat spots on the cheek, in the hair, et cetera. These die states can be seen progressively in certain die varieties. Considering the how nice this coin looks I would have to assume, without doing research, that this coin is in fact a MS coin that was produced by a die that had been in use for a little while, but not necessarily at the end of it's life.

I'm sure there are thousands of examples of extremely well struck CBHs that exhibit more details than this particular coin; however, with this series, exempting a coin for a weak strike is just not something that the TPG's should do.