The Monster Toned Coin Game Thread

I believe blue (by itself) is just not commonly seen or thought of as a high end color. It can be really nice or just ok. This one is closer to really nice, but not quite up to the standards displayed by some of the higher rated coins so far in this thread.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

@brg5658 you are up...

 

I guess it all depends on ones personal preference. There are those who specialize in blue toners. I agree that the rainbow toners can be magnificent.

 

The 1904-O Morgan lacks the sex appeal of a rainbow toner so I'll give it a 3.

 

I'll say it squeaks into 4 territory.

 

3

 

I'll go high 2.

I debated between a high 2 or low 3. There is color on both sides and it's appealing, but it just doesn't have enough to push it higher in my opinion.

 

That is a cool looking Morgan. I think by the scale it is probably a 3, but because of the unique nature of the toning, I give it a low 4.

 

I love the look, but for me it's a 2. Its almost 90% toned Brown/russet and I don't feel any monster should have that shade. That being said if this was just a how attractive is a coin, then I'd be a little higher.

 

Low 3

 

For me the toning on the coin is a 2 - almost 3.

I expected the variability of the scores to be quite high on this one. It is not the typical "monster" type toning for sure, but I find the way it is toned through the hair and cap to be particularly attractive. The full rainbow is present, and attractively laid out with respect to the coin design.

 

How can that be a 4, and the Blue Morgan was a 3? In terms of the absolute scale we are supposedly following, it does not make sense. If we are rating subjectively in terms of like/don’t like, it would make sense. However, we are ostensibly using the original rubric in terms of tone intensity.

 

I am rating them subjectively. I’m not partial to blanket blue toning, and the unique toning on this coin with the elevation chromatics boosted it IMO. I even said in my post that based on the scale it was probably a 3 but I’m bumping it to a 4. Likewise, your blue coin was probably a 4 that I downgraded to a 3 because I just don’t like that color scheme.

You also have to remember that we are judging these off photos. There is a definite possibility that my opinions of these two coins could flip flop if I saw them in hand and was able to see the result of luster & color in combination.

 

Then, I think we should throw out the scale, and just give opinions about the toning—we have deviated from it so much, it has minimal meaning. I have no problem with personal preference as to whether or not one likes a coin’s toning. That is what collecting is all about. However, if we are going to ignore @ddddd provided original rubrics, then let’s do so. Otherwise, we should stick to the rubrics more strictly. This is not at all personal, as I have no skin in the game—I sold the vast majority of my toned Morgans 5 years ago. It is just whether or not the scale is just a guide, or a fairly strict rubric. Perfect example was that Jefferson War Nickel that you posted. It was a monster, as far as Jeffersons go, but if we used the Morgan scale, it would objectively come out lower, as Morgans tone far differently than other species of coin.

 

The rubric was more of a guide and personal opinions are expected. Going forward, we can rely more on personal preference (as that seems to be what most are already doing).

 

Summary Chapter 1
Rd. 1: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 3.6 (Mid) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 2: 1880 Morgan PCGS MS62 [Obv]...CT -> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 3: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Rev]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 4: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 4.6 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5 (High)
Rd. 5: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS66* [Obv]...CT -> 3.2 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 6: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS?? [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 7: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 8: 1939-D Lincoln PCGS MS65RB [Obv]...CT-> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 9: 1972-D Ike PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT-> 2.3 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 2 (Low-Mid)
Rd. 10: 1892 GB Half Crown PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 11: 1967 UK Half Crown PCGS MS65+ [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 12: 1963 Franklin NGC MS65+* FBL [Rev]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 13: 1884-O Morgan PCGS MS63+ [Obv]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High)
Rd. 14: 1899 GB 6 Pence PCGS MS65 [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 15: 1926 F.I.C. Piastre PCGS AU58 [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 16: 1904 USP Peso NGC PF62 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 17: 1944 Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 [Obv]...CT-> 4.8 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 18: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 19: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS 68+ [Obv]...CT-> 6 (Monster) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 20: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 21: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 22: 1941-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67* 5FS [Dual]...CT-> 4.9 (Mid-High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 23: 1961 Franklin 50c PCGS PR 65 [Dual]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 24: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 61* [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 25: 1941-D Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 FS [Dual]...CT-> 3.6 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 26: 1708 GB Shilling PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 27: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS64 PL [Rev]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High)
Rd. 28: 1835 10c PCGS AU58 [Rev]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 5 (High)
Rd. 29: 1888 Morgan PCGS MS65+ [Obv]...CT -> 4 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 30: 1904-O Morgan NGC MS64 [Dual]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 2 (Low-Mid)

Summary Chapter 2
Rd. 31: TBD

 

Considering we went through 30 rounds, I'm proposing we start a new chapter.

The big changes:
~Personal opinion can have more weight (while the scale is just a starting guide)
~Let's use decimals (one decimal) to better describe high or low end for a particular score

 

That works. Ready with another, whenever you are.

 

You're up...