So I was revisiting some of my coins, and whenever I hold this coin I get annoyed because I feel the slab doesn't match the coin. I've been looking for a really nice specimen of this particular coin for years, and finally found one that has gorgeous toning and little to no wear IMO for a coin almost 350 years old. I sent it for grading to NGC after winning it raw, and feel it came back rather undergraded. I won't post the grade yet, or what I feel it should be, but I'm curious what other people think it would grade as?
Beautiful coin and looks to be very high relief. Because of the high relief, it looks like I can see some wear...towers and cherub's knees on the front. I'd probably give it an XF
I agree with kentucky a tiny bit of rub on the cherub's, but I see what looks to me like nice original surfaces with some luster remaining I think I would go all the way and call it AU58
This seems like a challenging coin to grade. I believe there is wear and will go with AU 55 as a complete guess. Regardless of grade, it's a beautiful looking coin with a great pictorial. Unlike some US coins, I don't think the grade matters a ton with this piece. The value is in the eye appeal. You mentioned how hard it was to find a nice specimen. Anyone else looking for one will run into the same issue. And those people will properly value your coin despite the grade on the holder.
A stunning piece regardless of technical grade.....it certainly has that desirable look to it. I've seen worse pieces in MS-61 holders. With some rub on high points factored in, I think this is an AU-58 if submitted 4 out of 5 times in current market grading practices. Eye appeal and originality in the deeper areas rounds it up from any lower AU grade.
I have admired your set in the past, but have to once again state that the sede vacante talers are outrageous. Wow.
I would say EF due to the wear on most of the high points of the design; but when I look at the edge rims I don't see any wear on the razor thin displaced metal there which tells me that this medal (or coin) is probably Unc with cabinet wear.
The core of my collection is from this era. Neither NGC or PCGS is particularly kind to these coins, in my opinion. My guess would be AU55-58 just based on my past experience. A details grade wouldn't surprise me at all. When I send stuff like this I worry about it until the grades are posted. Beautiful coin by the way. It is something I would buy if I saw it. On the flip side I have sent stuff in that I hoped for AU and got back as a 62.
Personally I'd call it a 50 but no higher than that, there's just too much wear. Pretty much all the high points on both sides show signs of wear.
Wow, y'all are brutal at grading, even more so than NGC! Too much wear? XF? 50? Environmental damage? Look at the little city views in the right picture, or the crown - there's no wear. Other than the highest points on the cherubs, the main city view towers, and the emperor's hair, the coin is pretty much flawless. I've seen coins graded MS64 that look far worse than this... I think it's a 64, held back from BU only because of the cherub wear. I won a 66 coin just last month that doesn't compare to this. Keep in mind this is not a coin made yesterday FYI, it graded as MS63, and I haven't seen a nicer specimen in over a decade of looking. I'm not unhappy with it, just a bit disappointed because I feel it's at least one grade higher.
I'm guessing in hand the 'wear' is just a difference in toning at the high points. I have a Shooting Taler like that--it looks worn but really the high points just don't appear to have the same depth of toning so to speak. In any case, this is definitely a case of set expectations and the difficulty of grading from a photo And for the record based on your comment I was guessing a 55--because I had an expectation set for a lower grade and due to the look in the photo. On something like this I don't think a 63 vs 64 would bother me, but I do have coins that the grade on the slab gets into my head. Even though it doesn't matter in theory, the reality is that it does for whatever reason. Nothing right or wrong with that, it just 'is' sometimes. Is this something PCGS would grade and would it be worth it to see how it crosses? Or crack and resend? Or just crack? It's a gorgeous coin and perhaps doesn't need a slab. Though I like slabs on my stuff for protection to identify for when my heirs decide to sell Or for selling myself as my type of material will sell better in a slab.
Very high relief will not show the wear spread out as evenly as it is on a low relief coin, rather it will be concentrated in a few areas. I imagine mid-high AU, with low AU or XF being disappointing.
I wasn't saying that's what I think it is, just guessing what the TPG said, since the topic is your disappointment with them. I thought it was UNC but know nothing about these. If NGC thinks it's uncirculated, then I agree that 63 is too low.