I gave it a 58. I see wear, more on the obverse than the reverse. Also, while baggy, I see some fairly significant gouges, not enough for a body bag but enough to downgrade it. I am fairly sure the TPG gave it an MS grade but I can't bring myself to do it.
I'm saying MS65. The obverse is only OK but the revrse seems very clean. My biggest problem is I'm not as familiar with the Liberty DE set and I still have trouble ID'ing wear/loss of luster from regular uncirculated bag marks.
I vote what I would buy them as, not what I think PCGS called it - like I do with all coins I buy. MS62.
I believe I was the first 58 vote. Glad to see I'm not the only one. I know very little about gold, but the obverse looks to me like it's been slid around in a few pockets, and across a counter or two, aside from the heavier marks that I could pass off as coin to coin contact.
First thought and my vote was MS 62 as there are too many hits/marks on the obverse (I wouldn't be surprised if PCGS gave it a 63-although I would consider it low end at that point).
@GDJMSP is of the belief that wear is wear, regardless of whether or not it occurred in circulation. The obverse of this coin was subjected to much coin-on-coin friction. I am of the opinion that it should not net an MS coin into the AU category. It is visibly different from all other forms of mechanical friction.
Baggy as can be but not the field luster breaks that show it circulated. Good luster I call it a tpg graded 62 that is personally grade 58
The obverse looks MS62 and reverse MS66. Net MS62 for me. I wouldn't pay anything more than the value of the obverse for a coin this far out of balance.
If you can't already see where the wear is, me telling you where it is won't help you. But it's in many places on the devices and in the fields as well. As I said originally, all over the obv.