Guess The Grade 1908 St. Gaudens $20 Double Eagle

Wow! Can't believe I was closer than most. I was one of the votes for MS66.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I figured it might be a high grade given the lack of contact marks. The areas I thought were rub must not be rub and maybe a slab shot or video that showed more luster would be more convincing of the grade.

 

The contact will remain the question u nless seen in hand.

 

Yup....what is all that discoloration on the high points like on the knee ?

But no contact marks, absolutely correct.

 

a 67 WOW !! that,s generous !! there appears to be obvious imperfection midway up the torch but again grading isnt an exact science...LOL

 

Here’s the grade on the one I submitted as a comparison

 

I've seen/read about many coins that were originally MS (admittedly I recall only up to MS-65 not higher) that were then graded by CACG and got shot down to AU-58 by JA's minions. Rub or wear or friction...on HIGH points.

Could even an MS-67 be misgraded ? I wonder.

 

I have looked for AU 58 CACG holders because of those posts but not many show up for auction. Most that I have seen were common Walkers or Mercury Dime where even at MS 65, the spread would not be huge (between AU 58 and MS 65). And some were bid up like they were MS 63. I believe the bulk of such coins don't make it to market as dealers crack them out to send to PCGS/NGC or collectors hold onto them. And I don't think there are that many examples in total.

As far as a 67 being misgraded, it can happen. Someone could have had a 58 and a 67 and accidentally switched the labels when holdering them (although that would be a rare event). If it is a point off, then that is just normal variance in grading and not "misgraded" in my opinion.

 

Obviously, that coin has a very fine luster to it, cold be an early die stage and surprise us all.

 

Overgraded. To truly be a 67 a coin has to be almost perfect.
This coin is far from almost perfect. These clowns either undergrade stuff and hope for resubmissions, or they over grade stuff for their buddies to sell at ridiculous prices. Too much corruption in the grading game to take this crap seriously anymore. Where is the integrity? You send something in that is a 65, they look at it for 3 seconds and you get a 63. But if it's their buddy, now it's a 66. Once grading became necessary in sports cards and coins, the hobby has been corrupted. Grading is subjective, it's not science. And now you "need" it in order to sell your coins because people are too ignorant/lazy to grade the coins themselves correctly. The grading business is a disgrace. When an auction company sends in coins for grading, they CONSTANTLY get the benefit of the doubt and coins that are 63/65 are all pulling 66 and 67s.
This business is a joke. But when a reg person sends a legit 65 coin in, they are lucky if it comes back 63 and not details. Grading is a huge scam that has been perpetrated upon the coin hobby.

 

I can believe this, ddddd....it would appear many of the submissions were from individual collectors, not necessarily dealers or resellers. And if those collectors wanted to sell, the coins in question DID have a big change in value going from MS to AU-58. So they wouldn't want to sell.

There definitely was some "label shock" on the CAC Forums from some people who weren't upset with a 1-point change, but dropping from MS to AU.

What about a coin -- let's say a Saint -- that was net graded MS-67 with the TINIEST amount of wear on a single high point ?

Pure technical graders like Insider and GDJMSP I think would say the coin has wear -- thus, AU bucket.

Market graders would say a minute amount on a single high point shouldn't knock it from MS to AU -- minimal bag marks, great luster, no dings....MS-66 or even MS-67. Rare at those numbers, much more common at MS-63 to 65.

 

I know this happens from time-to-time....and I don't doubt there aren't some dealers getting some favoritism (though hopefully more so on modern submissions)....but there are lots of people who just don't have the time or inclination to be proficient at grading and without the TPGs you'd be back at the Wild Wild West (without James West and Artemus Gordon !! ) before 1986.

Then instead of being off by 1, maybe 2 numbers...or Slider Debates concerning an MS-63 vs. AU-58....you'd have EF coins being sold as low-60's Mint State

 

This is true. But that's why it is up to the individual to educate themselves about grading, and it works the other way as well, some better coins fall through the cracks if you feel they are under graded. If you are educated about a certain series or years, you may have knowledge about die issues and coins that don't look MS can be graded much lower and your knowledge can come in handy.

 

It is possible but you would need something like an MS 69 Saint for that tiny amount of wear to net is to MS 67. And I don't know how many of those are out there (probably not more than a few among all Saints). In general, I can see something going as high as MS 65 with minor wear but it is hard for me to fathom a 67.

 

Yes, that's why I said much more common at MS-63 to-65 grades.

It's the drop from MS to AU that really shocked some people. And I could be wrong, but I also think some PCGS CAC coins that were being crossed may have lost some pedigree, too (but I'm less sure on this). Some of you probably know better than me.

 

From what I have seen, almost all previously sticker (NGC or PCGS) coins crossed at the same grade unless CACG realized there was something wrong (coin turned or sticker should not have been awarded in the first place). They add the letter "L" to signify legacy cross over but only up to a certain date (November 2007-June 5, 2023 per the article linked below).


https://help.cacgrading.com/support/solutions/articles/151000101823-legacy-crossovers-policy

 

Surely in that case they should have some sort of guarantee in effect...?

 

i think the odds of that are pretty good

 

I have seen a few cases and they do have some sort of guarantee. There was one example recently that had a sticker and then a note saying "PVC" that someone posted. Another person made JA aware of it and he asked for the person to call him. I'm not sure what was the final outcome there but in most cases I believe CAC buys back the coins or reaches some settlement where they remove the sticker and compensate for the difference.