A first for me - Show Grading - Guess the grade part 2 of 5

Part 1 is now in the books; check it out here:

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-first-for-me-show-grading-guess-the-grade-part-1-of-5.395975/

Now we move on.

Please guess the original grade and the new grade (originally PCGS and now PCGS). Are they the same or different?

Here I am including two photos (a PCGS TrueView and a photo from the seller).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

65

 

65 before, 65+ after.

 

I’m guessing the true view makes the marks look worse. I’m saying a color bump to 66

 

Wouldn't that be an end of roll toner?
The different reads between the photos is making me guess that they only gave it a 64.
It really depends on how flashy the contact on the cheek is?

 

I would guess 66?

 

65 originally. 66 after resubmission. Really beautiful obverse toning.

 

I'm assuming you thought it was an upgrade so....64 to 65

 

64 to 64?? Just a wild guess.

 

MS 65 to MS 65+

 

MS62*

OBV MS62*
REV MS64

Original holder probably a MS63

 

This one was a 65 and remained 65. I thought it could have added a plus (due to nice color and good luster) but this one was more of an add-on to get to the five coin minimum and to have a TrueView (I don't always like TrueViews but it helps the marketability if selling).

 

Part 3 here:

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-first-for-me-show-grading-guess-the-grade-part-3-of-5.396139/

 

Well I was a grade low, PCGS must have liked the color enough to give it a gem grade. Or, the toning is covering some of it.

 

So you're 0 for 2.

 

If you are talking to me. Yeah. in my defence contact like what is on Washingtons cheek should not be allowed on a gem grade coin.

 

No I'm referring to the results of the two posts so far, zero changes in grade. I'm also 0 for 2 guessing.

 

I love coins that look like they just came from the Mint. I am not a fan of the "coloring" that is on the coin. I have about 20 or more with small amounts of "color) the near the edge of my Morgans. Other than that, the coins that you showed us is pretty neat.

 

Dang, I missed this one. I will get in on your number 3 though. Nice Washington!

Edit, I would have been at 64 for the surfaces, I think they gave it the ole' color bump to 65.

 

I think it's a gem as the surfaces are on par with other 65s I've seen. The luster really solidifies the gem status. If it was a 65+ or 66, then I'd say a color bump was given.