GTG 1895 O

Yeah. I thinks it's a mix of the photos exaggerating the look and a net grade being a 95o. If the surfaces were more "clean" it could have gone 55, maybe even 58.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

AU55 and someone talk about dipping.

 

I would guess AU 53 but sometimes photos can be deceiving.

 

To me it looks like the luster is gone except in the protected areas. I, too, had thought likely it got treated generously because of being a better date in higher grades.

 

Sorry I'm late to the party. Interesting thread. Page one opinions were mostly XF. Then the grade was given and the opinions moved to AU.

I'm only an AU-50. The coin sure looks scruffy and it does look all hairlined-up from a cleaning BUT we don't have the actual coin in hand.

The only reason I'm posting is to suggest a grading "tip" from a seminar:

On coins like this that are weakly struck and have a flat area over the ear and on the eagle, I look at the leaves in the bottom half of the wreath on the reverse from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. Note that this coin has very slight rubbing in this area and almost all of the detail shows. That kicks this coin easily up to an AU. Give it a try.

 

Actually , you have that backwards.......
When you see a flat spot over the ear/chicken breast , and u can see sharply struck details in the wreath leaves (bottom left especially) that means the Morgan in question has a sharp strike but is worn from circulation, which ACTUALLY kicks the coin DOWN in grade, meaning a possible UNC just dropped to AU or an AU just got knocked down to an XF.

Side note: but I can also see where a seminar instructor would have you look to these areas to determine grade, and why this is an important attention to detail one must consider when grading

 

I'm very confident that you really know how to grade flatly struck dollars and that your post came out & just to me.

So, by your post, I guess you consider the OP's weakly struck AU coin to be an Extremely Fine and the TPGS made a costly mistake.

 

well yea, but maybe I should go some more , so I don't come off quite as next time we disagree. Certainly we can agree, to disagree on this coin. I could change my mind with different images .

 

I understood your post perfectly this time. The coin is a basket case yet IMO , most of the design detail that was on it when it was mint state is still left.

 

The first things that go in a dip are the luster grazes from the coin contact, that's how we know.

 

Meaning the coin goes kinda flat in tone?all one hue?

 

Not necessarily. The black scrapes from the other coins in the bag sliding against the fresh coat of luster on the coin are lightened by the dip and those areas blend in as though they weren't even there before.

 

Shoot. I missed the emoji competition

 

Really. That's so irritating looking at those posts.