To CAC or not to CAC - official game thread

1880-O = Green Bean

jom

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Welcome to Coin Talk.
Yes for the bean.

 

That Morgan dollar is really nice - yes to a bean.

 

Yes to the bean.

 

I am not sure when to post the reveal, just let me know. I also have plenty more coins that have been to CAC with professional images as well, I can keep on posting them if requested.

 

Usually we give it around 24 hours. You can call it earlier if you want. And the next round is open, so go on ahead when you're ready with another coin.

 

I will post the reveal as well as another right around 6pm Eastern.

 

Yes to green CAC on 1880-O $

 

CAC

 

To bean or not to bean, that's the question.

 

Sorry, my wife made snow crab legs for dinner and I got distracted.

The 1880-O did NOT bean. John Albanese said there is a touch too much friction on the cheek. However, I have seen far, far worse coins in 64 CAC holders.



Here is the next one. NGC, graded 65 Cameo.

 

@delawaredoons how is the luster on the Morgan? It looks somewhat muted in the photos and I could see that holding it back.

 

Rd. 1: 1921 MS 65 Green CAC Morgan--> Yes: 4 vs No: 3

Rd. 2: 1835 AU 50 Green CAC 50c--> Yes: 2 vs No: 8

Rd. 3: 1939-S Oregon MS 65 Gold CAC 50c--> Yes: 10 (8 Green and 2 Gold) vs No: 0

Rd. 4: 1838 AU 58 Green CAC (Gold $5)--> Yes: 1 vs No: 5

Rd. 5: 1908 MS 63 Green CAC (Gold $20)—> Yes: 5 vs No: 1

Rd. 6: 1885-CC MS 63 PL Green CAC Morgan--> Yes: 8 vs No: 1

Rd. 7: 1946-S MS 66 Green CAC Walker 50c--> Yes: 7 (6 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 1

Rd. 8: 1885-S MS 62 NOT CAC Morgan--> Yes: 5 (4 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 1

Rd. 9: 1830 EF 45 UNKNOWN CAC 50c--> Yes: 10 vs No: 1

Rd. 10*: 1899 MS 65 BN UNKNOWN CAC 1c--> Yes: 4 vs No: 5

Rd. 11: 1942 MS 65 Gold CAC 50c--> Yes: 4 (4 Green and 0 Gold) vs No: 2

Rd. 12: 1940-D MS 67 Star UNKNOWN CAC 10c--> Yes: 3 vs No: 4

Rd. 13*: 1884-O MS 61 Gold CAC $1--> Yes: 9 (4 Green and 5 Gold) vs No: 0

Rd. 14: 1827 AU 55 CAC 10c--> Yes: 1 vs No: 7

Rd. 15: 1851 MS 66 CAC 1c--> Yes: 5 vs No: 4

Rd. 16: 1919-S MS 65 Green CAC 10c--> Yes: 12 (11 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 0

Rd. 17: 1922 MS 65 NOT CAC Peace $1--> Yes: 10 vs No: 1

Rd. 18: 1851 Au 58+ CAC 1/2C--> Yes: 0 vs No: 6

Rd. 19: 1839-O AU 53 NO CAC 50c--> Yes: 6 (5 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 3

Rd. 20: 1920 MS 65 NO CAC 25c--> Yes: 4 vs No: 6

Rd. 21: 1862 PF 64 CAC H10c--> Yes: 5 vs No: 1

Rd. 22: 1869 PF 63 Gold CAC 10c--> Yes: 7 (5 Green and 2 Gold) vs No: 0

Rd. 23: 1834 XF 45 CAC $5--> Yes: 2 vs No: 5

Rd. 24: 1835 XF 40 CAC 25c--> Yes: 8 (7 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 2

Rd. 25: 1876 MS 62 Not CAC 50c--> Yes: 7 (6 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 1

Rd. 26: 1853 MS 64 Not CAC 10c--> Yes: 7 vs No: 0

Rd. 27: 1913 MS 62 CAC 2.5 Gold--> Yes: 1 vs No: 5

Rd. 28: 1835 AU 58 CAC 10c--> Yes: 3 vs No: 7

Rd. 29: 1908-S MS 64 CAC 1c--> Yes: 9 vs No: 2

Rd. 30: 1913-D MS 66+ CAC 5c--> Yes: 10 vs No: 0

Rd. 31: 1829 AU 55 NOT CAC 5c--> Yes: 11 vs No: 1

Rd. 32: 1851 MS 61 CAC 2.5 Gold--> Yes: 4 (3 Green and 1 Gold) vs No: 2

Rd. 33: 1936-D MS 66 GOLD CAC 5c--> Yes: 3 (3 Green) vs No: 2

Rd. 34: 1941-S AU 55 NOT CAC 10c--> Yes: 11 (2 Green and 9 Gold) vs No: 0

Rd. 35: 1924 MS 66 CAC 25c--> Yes: 3 vs No: 4

Rd. 36: 1936-D MS 67 Texas UNKNOWN CAC 50c--> Yes: 8 vs No: 1

Rd. 37: 1928 MS 66 Oregon UNKNOWN CAC 50c--> Yes: 9 vs No: 0

Rd. 38: 1893 MS 64 Isabella CAC 25c--> Yes: 2 vs No: 9

Rd. 39: 1820 AU 58 CAC 10c--> Yes: 3 vs No: 7

Rd. 40: 1881-S MS 65 CAC $1--> Yes: 7 (3 Green and 4 Gold) vs No: 0

Rd. 41: 1940 PR 66 CAC 50c--> Yes: 7 vs No: 0

Rd. 42: 1824 AU 50 CAC 50c--> Yes: 8 vs No: 1

Rd. 43: 1937 Texas MS 66 CAC 50c--> Yes: 5 vs No: 2

Rd. 44: 1903 PR 63 NOT CAC 50c--> Yes: 9 vs No: 1

Rd. 45: 1857 MS 64 CAC 10c--> Yes: 2 vs No: 6

Rd. 46: 1828 MS 62 CAC 10c--> Yes: 8 vs No: 1

Rd. 47: 1958 MS 67 FBL CAC 50c--> Yes: 1 vs No: 9

Rd. 48: 1902 PR 64 NOT CAC 50c--> Yes: 3 vs No: 4

Rd. 49: 1832 AU 58 CAC 1/2c--> Yes: 5 (1 gold) vs No: 4

Rd. 50: 1902 PF 61 CAC 25c--> Yes: 4 vs No: 2

Rd. 51: 1953-D MS 66+ FBL CAC 50c--> Yes: 3 vs No: 4

Rd. 52: 1880 MS 64 CAC $1--> Yes: 3 vs No: 2

Rd. 53: 1882-CC MS 62 CAC $1--> Yes: 5 vs No: 1

Rd. 54: 1892 MS 64 Columbian CAC 50c--> Yes: 5 vs No: 0

Rd. 55: 1895-O VF 20 CAC $1--> Yes: 1 vs No: 6

Rd. 56: 1880-O MS 64 Not CAC $1--> Yes: 11 vs No: 0

Green CAC on coin and deserves it: 21
Green CAC on coin and doesn't deserve it: 14
Gold CAC on coin and deserves it: 1
Gold CAC on coin but should only be Green: 4
Gold CAC on coin but should not sticker:
Failed to sticker but deserves a sticker: 9
Failed to sticker and should not sticker: 2
Unknown sticker status and deserves a sticker:3
Unknown sticker status and does not deserve a sticker:2


Note: if we don’t know the status of a coin before the reveal and more people say green CAC for a gold CAC coin, then it will go in the area of “Gold CAC on coin but should only be Green” ....see round 3 as the example case

*
Rd. 10 was 4-4...I interpreted that CircCam would consider it a no (based on a similar example), which swayed the overall vote to a lean towards no.
Rd. 13 was tied between green and gold at 4-4...I interpreted that geekpryde would consider it a gold

 

And now to the Proof Franklin....

YES to a GREEN sticker for me

 

It is fine. A touch of haze but nothing substantial. As I mentioned, JA specifically outlined "Cheek Scratches" as why he didn't bean it but I do not understand that as what scratches/friction are there are absolutely negligible for the assigned grade.

My guess is he is hesitant to sticker it because it is a $1200 coin in the present grade, but a plus is $3000 and a 65 is $12000. So even the slightest doubt is reason enough to not sticker it. That said, I have already turned down more than $3000 for it. It is a VERY tough date with color and this may very well be the nicest toner, color-wise, of the date.

 

The 1880-O in 64 - cheek looks very clean for a 64 / disagree with him. His taste does not match mine nor the 11-0 vote it would CAC.

Don’t let what he thinks bug you it’s a solid 64 if not PQ with the beautiful toning.

 

I don't buy JA's explanation. I wonder if it would have gotten a bean if he or one of his buds actually owned this coin. I hate to have this attitude but it seems like we've seen many examples of inconsistencies in this thread. The bottom line is the CAC process is highly subjective.

 

On the pf 65 cameo I agree with NGC. I vote green sticker. The fields are very clean / nice cameo contrast.

 

Exactly WX - I don’t buy it either. Too many inconsistencies in examples we have seen. My take exactly in looking over the list. It’s sort of like an independent audit.

 

Nice solid cameo on the Franklin but I see a few scratches on the face. It definitely isn't at a 66 level but looks 65. The scratches would put it in the C category. I won't give it a bean.