PCGS coin grading

This video is (IMO) well worth watching...it's 34 mins long so you might want to watch on a Sunday morning when you have the time.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I just watched it all. I got 6 correct. Most of the ones I missed I graded higher than PCGS.

 

You did very well then, especially considering that we do not have the coins in hand. I graded lower on several.

 

On that seated quarter, I got the numerical grade right, but not the other important piece of info. (I thought it was interesting that Ron Guth missed it too, when he took the test).
Thanks for posting it. I learned that they penalize coins about 1 grade point for fingerprint toning. And I thought it was interesting that Guth admitted that he would have graded that 1943-S Walking Liberty Half differently if it had been a 1941-P.

 

Umm, excuse me Fishy, but shouldn't this be in our Video Forum rather than in Coin Chat?

Chris

 

I missed the proof also. As for the Walker, I was a little perplexed by that also...I can see the strike being better from Philly, but the date??
@physics-fan3.14

 

Well I just took the test. It was not easy looking at the coins at an angle. I muted the video towards the beginning as I didn't want to be influenced by the commentary. I scored 8 out of the 20, I did catch the proof that you talked about and got it correct. I had only one coin where I was off fairly significantly, where I thought I saw rub and it was a gold. The rest I was about a point different than the PCGS grades, 7 over and 5 under. Overall it was pretty fun.

 

8 is VERY good. I sent the link to a friend of mine and he got 5 "right." It was funny to me that on the Morgan that the dude thought was DMPL, and on the 50c commem, they were so far apart they didn't even seem to want to discuss it much, lol.

 

@jtlee321
8 is VERY good, especially since we are at a disadvantage of seeing them in a video. I think it's a worth while learning tool. And I think they had a good variety of coins...did not see a dime...did anyone else?

 

Did anyone else think PCGS was ridiculously low on the 1912 lincoln cent? I graded it much higher.

 

That's because whatever you grade a coin is what it grades--TO YOU. There is a big difference between grading a coin and guessing what number a TPG put on its label.

You

 

Fact: if @GDJMSP took this test in person FOR REAL and found out he agreed with PCGS on say, 2/3 of them, he'd be disappointed in himself and would begin to fall into a deep depression.

 

I was surprised I did that well with the handicap we had over Charles, who got to see them in hand. That 1912 was gorgeous!! I thought proof for a moment, but I knew it wasn't. It was one of the 8 I got correct.

 

I didn't see any dimes in there either. That would have been a good one for the educational factor.

 

This same video was posted a couple of months ago. I took the challenge, and posted my results in that thread: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/pcgs-coin-grading-challenge-video.283044/

 

10 undergraded, 6 on the money, 4 overgraded. Guess I won't wait for the phone to ring from PCGS. Interesting exercise.
Steve

 

What I found interesting is how open they are about including appearance & toning in the grade - "distracting toning spots" "too many fingerprint toning marks", etc.