I sold all my Walkers and I gave this one to my twin brother for his birthday last year. If you look closely you can see fantastic light...
Doug, Not trying to start an argument here, but I don't think you can call that toning definitely NT, because of your own comments on the...
The reverse toning still looks questionable to me. But either way, the coin is attractive.
Your post came off as a cheap shot. If you meant it another way, then you are right, I over thought it.
The seller's grade is Choice Brilliant Uncirculated (CH BU) which translates to an MS64 grade. I think that is an accurate grading assessment,...
I don't think I can do any better than your photo. I always found that coin difficult to capture. The slab glare was terrible.
I remember that coin, [IMG] Can't believe how bad my photos used to be.
I don't think the coin is AT. I think that coin is one of those circulated Morgan Dollars that was polished and then placed in a framed board...
I am gonna go with MS64+ as well. The reverse is MS65 all day long but I think the light chatter on the cheek and right obverse field along with...
Ok, let me make one thing perfectly clear. I haven't posted on this site in about 3-6 months. I am not involved in whatever dispute you are having...
Did you hear that sound? It was the sound of Greg's point going right over your head! This post is deserving of a Come on Man!
Doug, Believe it or not, I actually agree with just about everything you have written in your last two posts. You are correct that we can't say...
NT NT QT
AT = Artificial Toning QT = Questionable Toning MA = Market Acceptable Toning WA = Widely Acceptable Toning (This is my own term that created) NT...
QT AT QT NT
NT QT QT QT
WA (All 3)
QT/MA MA MA
These proofs are difficult because I don't necessarily believe that the photos represent the actual appearance of the coins. I would classify all...
WA AT
Separate names with a comma.