Man I wish I jumped in early. I market graded it as 64/65 RB because the eye appeal for a large cent is off the charts. Congrats. Ridiculously beautiful coin.
asinine- Is that how you spell that word. I dont' think I have ever seen anyone write the word?? I do agree with Doug here but understand why the graders bump these coins as such due to the overall preservation of such an old coin with nothing more than cabinet friction (very light). :thumb:
Who said I bought into it or think the TPGs are right? I simply see it for what it is, and have learned to grade to their standard (just like I learned as a child to grade to the ANA standards, and later as an adult the TPG and EAC standards). Said another way, don't confuse "knowledge of" with "agreement with". That said, and taking a step back from the "right" or "wrong", do you agree or disagree with my assertion as to how the TPGs grade AU/MS pieces?
I think it is graded appropriately according to the typical standards seen today by the TPG's. I didn't realize how harsh Doug's response was. Sorry Doug- you didn't take you nice pills today. Take two and call us in the morning. encil::hug:
Apologies, but it was beginning to sound like you had. I disagree to a point but must admit that there are times when they do. And that's part of the problem for it seems like they do this, require wear in the fields for an AU grade, only when it suits them to do so. Not so long ago it never happened. If there was wear on the high points, not just cabinet or roll friction, then the coin got an AU grade every single time. Apparently those days are gone if your assertion is correct.