Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Publius2, post: 7677527, member: 105571&quot;]My original question was whether the gouge should have gotten this coin a details grade.&nbsp; We have some divergence of opinion and some ambiguity among the respondents which tells me that the coin is borderline in that regard.&nbsp; OK, pretty much what I had decided before I made the post.</p><p><br /></p><p>As to what straight grade it should be, a number of you opined that it should be MS-61 or 62 because of the gouge which implies that you think the coin&#039;s grade should be 64 without the gouge and should be net graded down from that 64 as the baseline.&nbsp; I have a different take on that:</p><p><br /></p><p>There are only two, maybe three, defects on this coin.&nbsp; The first is the obverse gouge already discussed and it is not a minor defect.&nbsp; The second is a very minor rim hit at K12 on the reverse.&nbsp; The third is darkish toning.&nbsp; I would posit that absent the gouge, this coin would be a candidate for a solid 65 and maybe a 66 and that the MS-64+ grade is actually a diminution due to the gouge.&nbsp; High grades in this issue are not really rare.&nbsp; PCGS lists 86 coins in 65 and up including plus grades.</p><p><br /></p><p>My conclusion being that PCGS, rather than give the coin a details grade, net graded the coin down to 64+ due to the gouge.</p><p><br /></p><p>None of this speculation on my part changes my feelings about the coin - a lovely piece with a fatal flaw.&nbsp; I am really just trying to put myself into the heads of the TPG graders to better understand what they are thinking and to test my own thinking against the more experienced and smarter collectors here on CT.</p><p><br /></p><p>Oh, one other thing:&nbsp; This coin has a PCGS slab label that attributes the provenance to D.L. Hansen.&nbsp; Make of that what you will.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in