Sometimes it's hard to figure out why some coins are graded and others aren't

The early half dimes have fascinated me for many years. That collector enthusiasm has led me to make some less than judicious purchases through the years, especially for the 1796 half dimes. Sometimes I have bought some coins that I should not have purchased. Here a couple of them.

Here are couple of my less than judicious purchases. This coin has a couple bite marks on it which resulted in a “body bag” or “no grade” about 20 years ago.



This poor little coin somehow received a straight grade from PCGS. It was improperly dipped and not fully rinsed off which resulted in the ugly toning. PCGS called it a VF-30.



Sometimes it's hard to figure out what goes through the TPG's grader's minds.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yeah I agree that the first one looks grade-worthy. The second one?-Not so much.

 

Busy month at the TPG...slow month at the TPG...perhaps. Hard to say what the motivations were.

 

The second one may have looked fine when graded and the colors changed after grading/slabbing.

 

this is one of the reasons I don't shell out big bucks for grading. They could grade them with common curtesy if nothing else. Paying out big bucks for nothing don't cut it.

 

If it comes graded fine but I am not a fan of TPG's. Even with minor issues, both of your coins look good to me. They are keepers in my opinion.

 

Large cents are the worst. They are not only inconsistent with the level of wear for a certain grade level, they add inconsistency with the level of market-acceptable problems. I’ve seen green large cents get straight grades, while at the same time a slight rim hit gets “detailed”.

 

Not to defend any TPG, but could that coin have been graded before it toned to show that appearance? I honestly can't believe that it was graded as it appears now. JMHO

 

If this comes back anything but DETAILS - Corrosion I'd be surprised. But whether it's VG Details or VF details is anybodies guess.

It is the first coin I have ever sent in and I've been collecting for over fifty years.


The problem is a tendency to deduct from both Details and net Grade for the same problems.

But getting the Attribution and a true view, even with a problem coin, will make it more desirable to a significant portion of buyers. It hurts putting this lovely coin into a tomb.

 

I agree wholeheartedly. The coin should not be penalized twice. Either detail or net grade but not both. While people may quibble over the EAC grading system, at least you get a straight sharpness grade and then a net grade to account for problems, which is a straightforward honest way to do it, IMO.

 

Accurate net grades also give you a benchmark for value.

The EAC approach is also fairer. There are very few early copper coins that don’t have some issue in addition to wear.

 

This is an example of a coin that I think deserves XF45 Details AND AG3 Net.

 

It’s possible that the coin had the pasty while color that you see in the areas that are not toned, but I doubt it. I owned this piece for a couple years before I traded it to a dealer against the price of something better. About six months later, it cropped up in a Heritage auction. It had not changed at all over that time. If the surfaces were still changing, the process would have continued.