You should try comparing them sometime, side by side. Sorry pal, I don't own it. I don't even collect coins anymore. All I do is study them
I think "PITA Mike" has a better ring to it and more apropos to the situation at hand.... Seriously, I apologize if I got under SE's skin. It was not my intent, but my direct questioning manner sometimes rubs people the wrong way. I suspect if we got together over a beer we'd get along just fine...Mike
Just for giggles Mark - tell me how you think these coins would compare to yours. Different varieties, I know.
Top coin – this is a late die state , mushy strike. Based only on the photo I would give it Au 58 tops. The coin also looks to have been dipped. This one is tricky because of the strike, it is possible this could have been graded higher but I do see what I think is enough friction to keep this below MS . Botton coin – Could be Au 58 but I lean towards Ms 62 or 63 , Nice coin above average strike , but also appears to be dipped.
TPG grades: Top coin -- XF at best. Too much field luster to grade higher, IMO, but I suspect it does. Bottom coin -- looks mint state to me. How'd I do?
It seemed to me you understood what I was saying but also that you were intentionally trying to tick me off by questioning everything about the difference between AU and UNC. I didn't make up the rules or guidelines or whatever you want to call them, yet you were intimating that it was all me. I've NEVER claimed to know everything, but one thing I do NOT do is state something as fact that I know isn't. If I do not say "I think" or "maybe" or something to that effect, I truly believe it to be true. Probably. Someone on the ebay coin chat and I had a big tiff 8 or 9 years ago, but we get along fine in person. But then, I only see him at FUN and usually only for a few minutes at a time because he's usually got a crowd. One of the problems of internet forums and text only communication is that communication is (according to my leadership courses in the navy) either 70% or 90% (can't remember which, but I'm leaning towards 70) non-verbal. Tone of voice, inflection, posture, movements, of course none of which is visible on my computer screen.
now here is a curveball you didnt tell us according to whom? are we grading the actual coins? or are we going to guess what the TPG grader smoked before they graded it?
okie i have a solution coin no 1 GD- what is it doing in a holder are you blind cant you see the scratches no grade ok if you argue with me long enough ill relent to a 45 to get you off my back spock but no it should nt be graded TPG grader- man what a purty coin it looks so smooth i cant see the scratches nor can i feel it with my thumbs - it reminds of my bald head lets give it AU 53 coin no 2 GD - spock cant you see the wear over the cap you will never learn grading you can only grade coins that you buy nothing else arrrgh who let him out arrgh TPG grader - there are hardly any MS coins for these when will these stupid people ever learn but i have got a company to run and also a market let me give it a MS 63 and i am sure they will call it album friction, cabinet friction, forum friction to explain it to themselves
Both coins are graded AU50. For what it's worth Mike, I agree that the first one is over-graded. I'd call it 45 too. The second one, I think they got right. And yeah, I have no doubt that both coins have been dipped. But I purposely picked out dipped coins because I didn't want to hear any of the "it's toning" excuses. Of course everybody still gets to use the "it's a picture" excuse - because it is. But that second coin, it's amazingly similar in condition to Mark's coin that started this thread. And had it not been dipped, so that the "toning is covering up the luster" excuse could still be used, I have no doubt that it would have been graded as MS62/63. And just in case any still have doubts about the assigned grades, the links to the coins - http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=430&Lot_No=3449#photo http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=28114&Lot_No=24229#photo And if there is still doubt that the TPGs routinely over-grade this series of coins, take a look at the population numbers sometime. What you will find is that from just NGC and PCGS alone over 50,000 of them have been graded as AU50 and up. An extraordinary number given the age of the coins and the fact that they did circulate. Also extrordinary because coin collecting was virtually unknown at the time they were minted. So collectors cannot be used to account for the numbers (according to the TPGs) being saved in high condition.
see i was right on both. how come you dont say anything when i am right now if i was wrong we would have had a second installment of the bible waiting for me or maybe you have mellowed down sensei
I agree with the grade on the NGC coin at Au 50 . Strongly disagree with the Au 50 on the PCGS coin although with the larger Heritage picture I would have called it Au 58 and not MS . Details wise that coin is not Au 50 , maybe it has zero luster in hand and they dropped it to Au 50, or there is something else going on with the coin not visible from the picture. You can split hairs on this as many ways as you want , but I have an MS 62 coin certified by CAC as MS 62, when I sell it chances are highly in my favor that I will get MS 62 money. As I said before if you want to makes us believe that you are better at grading a coin from a photo then PCGS and CAC did when they had the coin in hand then I will never win this argument.
Not at all Mark, I would never in a million years make such a claim. I would never even claim that I am as good at grading coins in hand as they are. And as anyone who has been around this forum for any length of time can attest - I do not even claim to be an expert on anything to do with coins. My only claim, in regard to this thread, is that the TPGs, and CAC, routinely grade Bust half dollars as being MS that are not any more MS than I am. And the market accepts this.
slowly the tru age is coming out Que pasa? I want my money back nah its okay even i am not an expert I thought you were a MR and not a MS myself qonder why we need the market in this one?