The Official CoinTalk Grading Experiment 29

How good is CoinTalk compared to the TPGs? Let's find out! Over the next several months, I'll be posting a continuous stream of Guess the Grade threads. I will be using photos from the Heritage auction archives (please do not cheat!).

All you have to do is guess the grade! I will be attaching a poll to each thread. Please select the grade that you think best represents the coin (to avoid bias, please select your grade before viewing the rest of the thread).

Also please post your opinions about the coin, and it would be most educational if you could explain why you chose the grade you did.

Around Christmas, I will tally up the results and see how we did. This thread is an offshoot of a recent thread where I compared CT grading to the TPG, seen here: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/how-good-is-cointalk-at-grading.343417/

We're going to cover a wide range of material, and some of it may be out of your wheelhouse. However, if you are a confident grader, you should be able to accurately grade almost any coin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

" We're going to cover a wide range of material, and some of it may be out of your wheelhouse. However, if you are a confident grader, you should be able to accurately grade almost any coin."
I kind of disagree with this statement as each coin type has its own intricacies

 

64. One mark in a focal area away from a 65

 

I always try to make my guess before I read anyone else's response. I went with MS63. Probably low.

 

My instinct on gold is almost always low because it is softer and the TPGs are more lenient with marks. My instinct here was 63 so I will say it is graded MS64.

 

I believe this to be a low-end 65. It is very clean and well-struck

 

Enough cheek marks and the one on the reverse hold it to 64

 

64 ...I've seen a lot more hits/marks on 60-63, so I ruled those out (something makes me think AU is a possibility, but I don't believe there is any wear based on the photo)

 

I like 64. Was going 65 until I saw the nostril. Still would love to have it. Jim

 

65. Hits are minor, the mark on the cheek is not bad. Gold gathers more scuffiness than silver. Luster looks pretty good, fields are clean, strike is good, and it's a rather attractive coin. It's too clean for a 64.

 

64

 

I went 65.
A gorgeous coin that w/o the marks on his face would be 66 easy IMO.

 

'64

 

I'll post the grade reveal tomorrow, to give everyone a chance to participate. There has been low turnout for this group, because of Christmas.

 

64 with a little hesitation as I think the TPGs might well call it 65. I just think it has few too many small nicks.

 

65

 

I'm drawn to the cheek every time I look at it. 64 for me..

 

I went 65 on it with just a quick look without putting too much thought into it.

 

With 33 guesses, CT called this a 63.6. NGC and CAC called it a 64.

I'm actually a bit surprised by the low guesses on this one. To be fair, over half of you got it right. I think this is a high end 64, and honestly questioned why it isn't 65 when I first saw it. I think the luster is probably what holds it to a 64. Contact marks are minimal, with only a couple of significant marks. There isn't a lot of disturbance in the fields, either. To me, this looks like a borderline 64/65.

 

Rats. This ends up in a 65 holder sooner or later. Very clean for a 64. I agree that if anything would have kept if from 65, it would be the luster.