Recently I ran this 2 1/2 Indian at auction after getting it certified: http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=3158&lot=1981 My question is where do the grading services draw the line? Is it possible/probable I could have gotten a numerical grade on a better day, or with PCGS, ANACS, or ICG?
Maybe ANACS or ICG. I don't think PCGS would let it slide. The scratch itself is glaringly obvious......
If I had left on a sunny windowsill for a couple of months, reverse up, maybe better chances? I sent a Saint to PCGS recently with a slight scratch on the reverse. They let it slide and it graded MS64.
I don't know. Startin' to play with the coin doctor Gods. They look for things like that you know. Then again, you could catch a couple o' folks napping on a Monday/Friday when the A-team staff calls in sick.
No amount of toning would cover all of those scratches. (there are at least 6) Some yeah, but not the others. OK, but how long was the scratch in relation to the coin, how deep was it, and where was it ? (these are things that determine it) And was there only 1 scratch ?
Scratches seem to get the hammer if they appear to be intentional I have several coins in the XF/AU range that have minor circulation random scratches that have made the grade. Normally coins with the graffiti type of marks or test X's seem to not make the grade. Note that my coins are silver not gold but the results seem to be the same.
You have much better eyes than I do--do you have any tips so that those with under-endowed vision can come up to speed? On the Saint, it was actually a long scratch. They let it slide because it was old and had toned over probably. The thing about that 2 1/2 Indian is that the obverse is close to MS64, worth over $1000 in that grade.
All ya gotta do is look. I circled and numbered 8 of them. But perhaps most interesting is the second picture. Having a hard time believing it happened, but there it is. The whole edge of that coin is caved in.
Well it's not exactly a term that you would hear, but I didn't know what else to call it. Look at the edge of the coin where around the slab prong that I circled. It's bent, pushed down - caved in.
I saw that too, Doug, but I think, after looking at it further, it's the way the lighting is hitting it. See how that holder prong is the only one shadowed? I believe the light source is on that side at an angle. Otherwise, I believe the rim would show deformity and I'm not seeing it. Guy
On the TPG websites they say they will let scratches slide on older coins, I think I saw it on PCGS. I feel a scratch should be let slide as long is it can pass as a long bag mark, not gotten from circulation or something intentional.
I agree... but it does give the illusion of being "caved in"... almost like someone took a bite out of it. Just like in the old westerns, where they "bite" the coin before accepting it.
Thanks for your analysis on that 2 1/2 Indian. To me the curved indentation on the obverse does not look like a scratch but typical of those coins. And on reverse problems on Indian coins, these are too common in my experience. It is what makes the difference between low mint state examples and MS 63 and above grades. While we are at it where would you peg this 1914 2 1/2 Indian in terms of good for grade or not, another auction lot of mine: http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=3109&lot=1872&imagetype=j2 Please note: the 1914 is usually lackluster and not particularly well-struck.
I'd say that one was dipped a bit too long in an effort to get the black off the coin. Couple that with the field scrapes behind the eagle's head and above the wing and I'd say PCGS was being generous when they assigned it a 62.
The decision by a grading company, whether to assign a numerical grade to a coin, can be as difficult, subjective and inconsistent as the decision regarding what numerical grade to assign. It is not always an easy call. And just as a coin might receive one grade one time and a different grade the next, a coin might no grade one time and grade the next or vice versa. I can't comment with conviction on the coin in question, not having seen it in hand.
Not really, I just call 'em as I see 'em. PCGS obviously saw something to make them say 62, and there are no other marks of any consequence. So poor luster and the marks I mentioned pretty much have to be the reason for their grade. Would I change my mind is I saw the coin in hand ? Maybe, but PCGS did see it in hand and they still graded it low.
