As I look to grade my coins and also review the grades at a coin dealer I have a question. Is there a priority on Obverse or Reverse? For example, maybe the obverselooks like a "F" and the reverse looks like a G. What would you do?
It is a good question and I have often thought it would be a good thread to discuss which series are more "obverse-focused" and which are at least equal between obverse and reverse. For some series, the obverse takes precedence and is more important than the grade on the reverse (for instance, Walking Liberty Halves). In that case, if the obverse is an AU50 and the reverse is an AU55, my sense is that the coin is probably going to be graded AU50 by the third party graders. However, some series actually place a great (and at least equal) emphasis on the reverse. A good example of this is the Buffalo nickel where the buffalo's horn and the hair on the buffalo's head and shoulder as well as the buffalo's tail are critical to the grade of the coin.
In matters of importance the obverse is always the more important of the two, with US coins. But when it comes to grading, a coin is always graded by its worst side. Say a coin has a 65 obv and 63 rev - the coin is graded 63.
Yep, these days that's the way it's done. There was a time when split grading was done, i.e., a separate grade for obverse and reverse.
.....some how that seems weird with many terms referring to the obverse of coins in their descriptions. you would think the obverse would take priority on grading. jmo.
I agree with the first sentence above, but disagree strongly with the second one. The obverse often (if not usually) carries enough weight, such that a coin which is 65 on the obverse and 63 on the reverse, will receive an overall grade of MS64.
I go with the worse side gets the grade. If a hamburger is burnt on only one side, the whole thing still tastes burnt.
Mark I was hoping you would weigh in on this thread, given your experience as a grader. Is the above true even for a coin such as a Buffalo nickel, where there are so many grading points on the reverse (hair, horn, tail)? In other words, does the reverse carry greater weight for some series than others (though apparently never trumping the obverse)? I have read everything David Lange has written on Buffalo's that I could find and it seems to be the case.
To a degree, I suppose that the reverse could be considered more important on some coins than on others, but never to the extent that it begins to approach the obverse in terms of (grading) importance. Let me ask you a question - IF you do so, why do you consider the reverse on a Buffalo Nickel more important than the reverse on a Peace Dollar, for example? In my view, flaws are more easily seen and conspicuous on the latter than on the former. By the way, if you or anyone else would ever like me to chime in on a thread, please feel free to send me a message to make me aware of that - I'm sure I miss a lot of threads.
Sounds silly but how true that is. I would say primarily with coins of some value especially. For low valued coins, should not make much of a difference. But when it comes to the rarer ones, the worst is what people go by. Usually on most coins people look only at the obverse. This is why almost all errors are found on the obverse. Not that there are no errors on the reverse, but few really look for them. Always exceptions though such as the Buffalo Nickel which many think the Buffalo is the Obverse.
Thanks, Mark. I of course focus on Buffalo's because I collect them and probably would not pick the Peace Dollar as one I would view as having a less important reverse -- the reverse is just too attractive. Maybe I place too much emphasis on the reverse strike of a Buffalo, but a pet peeve for me is a Buffalo with no hair definition north and west of the horn. (David Bowers talks about this strike weakness at some length in his book on Buffalo's and Jefferson's, as does Lange -- as you know, it was an issue at Denver and San Francisco in the later teens and twenties).
Interesting, so you say that PCGS ignores this aspect of their own written standards too huh ? I'd ask about the ANA standards but they're ignored anyway.
I don't know what their standards say. But I do know that far more weight is given to the obverse than the reverse. And that countless coins are graded higher than the lower quality/graded reverse would otherwise dictate. Doug curiously, what did you read from PCGS that led you to write what you did? Thanks.
IMO, The Obverse outweigh the Reverse on Several coin examples. Like the wheat cent, and the IHC, whereas the Morgan is a completely different story.
The Morgan isn't different in that regard. The importance of its obverse relative to its reverse is as important as any coin type that I can think of.
I disagree, still. The wear on the eagles feathers on his chest, are much more distracting and they steal from treh eye appeal of the coin much more then the wreath on an IHC, IMO.
Moreso with the Morgan than most others? Interesting. To me the reverse has a lot more going on than the obverse, but I can see that in general terms the obverse is a more important aspect of coins.
