This post further illustrates why I'd like to submit my 3x graded PCGS SLQ for reholder and TrueView. It can be so difficult to see that FH detail through TPG plastic, especially older holders which might have some scratches. One of my OGH's plastic looks almost yellowed when placed next to a newly encapsulated coin. Still think OP's coin is awesome!
I find it hard to believe that hairline is full, but NGC is much more conservative than PCGS on strike designations. Sometimes photos show blending where there is none.
I found it difficult to see the hairline through the scuff on the holder, but it all looked there to me, just tough to see. and besides... it’s a Type I, so not as hard to find in FH as a Type II
The style of the head and the helmet changed from Type I to Type II and they are so different that they have different criteria for FH
I actually think the opposite, because the 1917 is so common with full head, they should be more stringent in their application of the FH designation for that date/mm.
People are kind of AU-crazy recently. They are seeing circulation that just isn’t there. Unless one puts up perfect photographs, some folks will see a reflection, and call it wear. C’mon, folks, this coin screamed MS.
I concur. Edit: aha. Late to the party. I had a hard time making much out of Liberty's ear through the plastic, so wasn't prepared to speculate on FH status. The coin's luster, color, and overall appearance resemble a 1917 T1 MS64 FH I once owned, which was in either PCGS or small white ANACS plastic (I forget). So anyway, that's why I went 64. Pretty coin. I also like that it's in pre-prong plastic.
The problem is it is not there. (MS) Not kickin @Santinidollar it is a beautiful coin. If you cant see evidence of rub in spite of your own pocket book. Not sure that you will ever have a handle on grading the way it was and should be passed on.
Not worth trading insults. There are far bigger problems in the world. There is a Pandemic that is more significant than AU versus MS.