To CAC or not to CAC - official game thread

1913 $2-1/2 NGC 62: I think it's good for the grade, but I don't think it's an A or B coin. There are too many scratches both obverse and reverse and a pretty good size gouge under the M of UNUM on the reverse.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Forgot to say it: No bean.

 

As a general comment on this thread: This is very enjoyable and I had hoped it would be educational by sharpening my understanding and skills at grading and CAC assessments. I find, however, that as far as CAC is concerned, I am still largely confused. Going into this, my impression was that CAC was not very consistent or transparent about that thing they do. And I still think that - as I find that there doesn't seem to be an articulable set of detailed standards and for what few standards that have been articulated they don't seem to adhere to them.

OK, my quibble is over and back to the game.

I have another coin I'd like to post when my turn comes up again.

 

I too have learned a lot and found this thread interesting. It's told me several things: buy the coin, not the bean; a coin in hand probably looks different than a coin in picture; I'll stick to eating beans than giving beans.

 

I think our game here demonstrates that CAC is merely a second opinion on a grade — nothing more, nothing less. The key word is opinion.

 

OK, coin jurors. We need some more opinions on the latest coin.

 

The problem is, the pictures aren't really good enough for us to give a valid opinion. The obverse especially is way underlit, and both sides are out of focus. Please retake the photos of this coin, and I'll guess. Based on those pictures, we're giving you a coin toss at best.

 

I think the absolute highest priority of every collector should be to learn to grade for themselves. Any serious collector needs to be confident in their grading. You shouldn't need anyone else to tell you the grade - and you definitely shouldn't need someone else to tell you that someone else's opinion of the grade is correct. The whole scheme is foolish!

The TPG is supposed to be the backup.

Having another party grade the graders is just ridiculous.

And that was some of the point of my recommendation to start this thread

 

Gold: No bean

jom

 

This one is locked away so a retake’s not possible now. I’ll post the reveal tomorrow.

 

Too many scratches. No bean.

 

OK. Here you go....

 

PCGS AU58 Did she get a bean?

 

Looks like a solid 58 to me. Other than some marks on her chin from shaving I'd give her a green bean. Of course my latest track record hasn't been good either.

 

Tough call. I’m going no from the pics due to lack of luster. That being said it’s a pretty coin I wouldn’t care if it had a bean or not I think it would bean at the 55 grade. But technically I think 58 is right

 

Your comment about lack of luster for no bean is interesting to me. The 58+ half cent I posted in this thread earlier had no luster but got a green bean. I've heard others say the same thing in their analyses for not giving a bean. I find this whole CAC thing full of inconsistencies. The more this thread progresses we should all go back to the beginning and reevaluate each coin to see if our perceptions changed.

 

Many feel the same. I'm walking the fence on the topic.

 

No bean. Attractive but barely 58.

 

I’ll vote yes on the bean for this one. Looks nice and original

 

I think I see some luster remaining around the stars-to-rim and reverse legend-to-rim and there's probably some luster under some of the toning but I'm not great at seeing luster. The obverse marks, under the lower-most curl and particularly on Liberty's chin are distracting. Obverse and reverse strikes seem a little weak to me. I think it's a 55 and over-graded at 58 therefore no bean.

My track record on this CAC or No CAC is pretty bad so I'll probably get schooled on this one too.

If it's open after Larry, I'm ready to submit one.