What would you grade this bust half?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by JCB1983, Nov 26, 2011.

Page 3 of 4
  1. JCB1983

    JCB1983 Learning

    Sometimes I believe that the people of this forum are more accurate at grading than PCGS. They are still subject to human error, and are not in the comfort of their home. The coin is indeed slabbed. I am sorry if I was misleading in this post, but I wanted to get a fair objective opinion from the CT community without it being skewed by a slab. So I change my question. What would you grade this coin after seeing it slabbed? I myself felt as though this was not graded accurately, and that is why I made this post. I understand that I probably over-paid even at this grade, but couldn't resist. Does this shed light on the fact that PCGS grading standards have changed? Or is the first picture misleading because of the light. In my limited experience I tend to agree with Doug on this one, totally over graded. I was going to post the slabbed pictures a little bit sooner, but was reserved because I didn't want to make a mockery of the graciousness of the experts on this forum. I would also like to note that I wanted to get honest feedback, and I appreciate it. O.k. here comes the real criticism.


    PCGSBustHalf53.jpg 1834pcgsbustreverse.jpg
     
    JCB1983, Nov 27, 2011
    #41 + Quote Reply
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Merc Crazy

    Merc Crazy Bumbling numismatic fool

    In the words of one high-end dealer... dreck. It's dreck. I guess the pics make it look worse than it is. I couldn't say... I don't think it's an AU53 quality coin, though, even if it is problem free, I'd grade it XF45. A real high-end XF45, but an XF45 nonetheless.
     
    Merc Crazy, Nov 27, 2011
    #42 + Quote Reply
  4. LindeDad

    LindeDad His Walker.

    Your first set of images really slews our preception of the coin.
     
    LindeDad, Nov 27, 2011
    #43 + Quote Reply
  5. green18

    green18 Unknown member Sweet on Commemorative Coins

    Yes, but he slewed us so shrewdly.........:)
     
    green18, Nov 27, 2011
    #44 + Quote Reply
  6. JCB1983

    JCB1983 Learning

    I'm sure it was a bad buy. You can see the listing here.

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/400258115707?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1497.l2649

    I made the mistake of buying from a new seller, and he had some user feedback that scared me. There were accusations that his coins weren't properly represented in his pictures. Another reason why I made the post, after having buyers remorse.

    I truely didn't mean to disrespect or try to mislead anyone. If this was misgraded, I believed it could lead to a discussion.



    This is some of the negative feedback that I should have checked before the purchase.

    http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISA...=negative&interval=365&_trkparms=negative_365
     
    JCB1983, Nov 27, 2011
    #45 + Quote Reply
  7. green18

    green18 Unknown member Sweet on Commemorative Coins

    There were a few folks here who did agree with the AU designation. Chris (medoraman) nailed the grade. :)
     
    green18, Nov 27, 2011
    #46 + Quote Reply
  8. green18

    green18 Unknown member Sweet on Commemorative Coins

    The guy sells a ton o' stuff. What you mean a "new seller"?
     
    green18, Nov 27, 2011
    #47 + Quote Reply
  9. JCB1983

    JCB1983 Learning

    Oh sorry, I meant that I had never purchased anything from him before.
     
    JCB1983, Nov 27, 2011
    #48 + Quote Reply
  10. medoraman

    medoraman Supporter! Supporter

    Considering its graded by PCGS, I would imagine the area Doug highlighted and the dots I mentioned are toning. While the pic looks flat, without seeing it in hand I would disagree with the grade. I stand by my guess this used to be a XF-45/AU50 but today would most likely be graded a 53.

    How does the luster look in hand? Is it much more pleasant than the first photo?

    Chris
     
    medoraman, Nov 27, 2011
    #49 + Quote Reply
  11. mikem2000

    mikem2000 Lost Cause

    I am good with the grade also. There is no wear on the talons, and for the most part, an XF CBH shows a bit more wear on the wings. Of course you can always find examples to the contrary. Like I said in my original post, I liked the coin because it had a nice strong strike. You might have gotten bonus points for that. Congrats on a nice CBH.

    Mike
     
    mikem2000, Nov 27, 2011
    #50 + Quote Reply
  12. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    Grading from images. Never know what folks will guess.
     
    ldhair, Nov 27, 2011
    #51 + Quote Reply
  13. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Well, rather obviously PCGS didn't think the coin was harshly cleaned. No big surprise there really. Certainly not the first time I've disagreed with them on that point, nor will it be the last. That said, it is widely known that most of these coins, even many of those slabbed, have been harshly cleaned. But in many cases it is deemed to be market acceptable, no getting around that.

    As for the black eye. At one point the entire coin was black. It was then dipped to remove the heavy black toning. The heavy black you see in the recesses and protected areas is what remains of the black toning that covered the entire coin. It is because the person who dipped it was afraid to let the acid work anymore for fear of making the coin guaranteed to be undgradeable or market unacceptable. For even the TPGs have limits regarding this. But with Bust Halves, those limits are stretched.

    As I said before, would I change my mind if I saw the coin in hand ? Maybe, but I doubt it. A coin being in a slab means nothing to me beyond authentication. But it certainly works for most folks. If nothing else it makes the coin sellable.
     
    GDJMSP, Nov 28, 2011
    #52 + Quote Reply
  14. JCB1983

    JCB1983 Learning

    That is awesome. Thanks for the response. I feel like I just watched an interesting episode of cold case files on A&E, with GDJMSP being Bill Curtis. Thank You for your time guys. I always assumed that slabbed coins were pretty much cut and dry.
     
    JCB1983, Nov 28, 2011
    #53 + Quote Reply
  15. Mark Feld

    Mark Feld Rare coin dealer

    I don't see any evidence of what I would call "harsh cleaning". I would expect bright white and/or badly hairlined surfaces, if that were the case.
     
    Mark Feld, Nov 28, 2011
    #54 + Quote Reply
  16. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Not all over-dipped coins are bright white Mark. Nor are all of those where heavy toning has caused minor corrosion underneath the toning.
     
    GDJMSP, Nov 28, 2011
    #55 + Quote Reply
  17. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    An assumption that many make, to their own regret.
     
    GDJMSP, Nov 28, 2011
    #56 + Quote Reply
  18. Mark Feld

    Mark Feld Rare coin dealer

    Agreed, of course, Doug. But what do you think you are seeing which causes you to declare the coin "harshly cleaned". Or maybe I should ask what you mean by that?
     
    Mark Feld, Nov 28, 2011
    #57 + Quote Reply
  19. LindeDad

    LindeDad His Walker.

    You might of as that is one of at least three Id's I know of used by South Hill Coins. You can also over pay at their store as I've done that too.
     
    LindeDad, Nov 28, 2011
    #58 + Quote Reply
  20. jello

    jello Not Expert★NormL®

    EF as for cleaned Only the coin knows! Photo don.t show a cleaning.
    $400.00 was to much.
    :kewl:
     
    jello, Nov 28, 2011
    #59 + Quote Reply
  21. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    The are many ways that a coin be harshly cleaned. When a coin has been over-dipped and sent in to a TPG it is not labeled as having been over-dipped. It is often labeled as having been harshly or improperly cleaned. Over-dipping a coin is merely one of the forms of harsh cleaning.

    PCGS uses one or the other of two designations for it -

    92|N-2 Cleaned – surface damage due to a harsh, abrasive cleaning

    94|N-4 Altered Surface - Whizzed, harsh cleaning, thumbed over
    (using a pasty substance to cover defects or alter the appearance).

    NGC typically just says - Improperly Cleaned for all forms of harsh cleaning, including over-dipping.

    I am of the same opinion. Over-dipping is merely one of the many forms of harshly/improperly cleaning a coin.

    With this coin, what I have already said indicates to me the the coin has been over-dipped - thus harshly cleaned. The heavy black in the protected areas like the eye, around the date, in the holes above the date, in the eagle's eye, the wing feathers, the U in UNUM, around the E in STATES, the overall speckled appearance of the surfaces - all of these things indicate the coin was once completely covered with heavy black toning.

    Now the heavy black toning all by itself would destroy all or nearly all of any luster the coin may have had. And based on the amount of remaining detail on the coin it should have some luster, even in the fields. Especially inside the letters and recesses, and some protected areas. But there is none, in either set of pictures, with the exception of maybe a tiny bit around a couple of stars. So either the heavy toning, or else the dipping of the coin removed that luster, because wear sure didn't. There isn't enough wear to have removed all that luster.

    But if you look at the fields you can see small, shallow depressions here and there - depressions caused by minor corrosion. Exactly what heavy black toning is expected to do to a coin. But almost all of those are clean, they show as being grey with no trace of black. And typically the only way those depressions get cleaned out like that is when the coin is over-dipped.

    Then you have the area at 9 o'clock, between the wing and UNITED. As I said, when you look at the pictures full size this area to me looks to have been scraped with something in effort to remove something. If you look close you can even see some tiny scratches inside that area.

    Combine all of that and you have, in my opinion, a coin that has been harshly cleaned.
     
    GDJMSP, Nov 28, 2011
    #60 + Quote Reply
2 more messages...
Page 3 of 4
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page