1926 Sesquicentennial - Does it Merit the TPG Grade?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Publius2, Aug 8, 2022.

  1. Publius2

    Publius2 Well-Known Member

    First, a disclaimer: The coin shown here does not belong to me. It was offered at auction last night.

    A recent thread on this commemorative issue prompted me to look at several of these coins offered for auction last night. Some were nice but not remarkable MS-65s that sold for pretty high hammers. But one was a PCGS-graded MS-64 that looked nice at first glance with good color, strong strike, luster. But upon closer examination, I concluded that this coin, if I won it, would always cause me regret. Every high point on the obverse and most on the reverse exhibit at the least luster breaks and possibly actual wear. IMHO, this coin is a nice AU-58 and could be a modern-day slider to a low-MS grade. But not a 64. Anyway, I didn't bid on it (starting bid was over-priced anyway) and no one else bid on it either.

    So, what does the membership think about the grading on this coin?

    1926 Slab Obv.jpg 1926 obv.jpg 1926 Rev.jpg
     
    Mr.MonkeySwag96 and spirityoda like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Treashunt

    Treashunt The Other Frank

    Not a 64 to me
     
  4. lordmarcovan

    lordmarcovan Eclectic & Eccentric Moderator

    I see no reason to question the grade. Mind you, I've never owned one, and am far from experienced with grading this type, but it looks OK to me as a 64. It has some little tickmarks on Liberty's legs, but for all I know, those fall within tolerance for the grade. Maybe it should be a 63 and maybe not, but I don't find 64 out of the question, personally.

    A slider? I dunno. I think it makes it onto the MS spectrum.
     
    eddiespin likes this.
  5. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    If it slides from AU58, it slides, at bottom, to MS63, probably most likely to MS64. It blows right by MS60-62. I can see MS64 on this one. The fields are clean. It's not hit up anywhere. There's luster.
     
    lordmarcovan likes this.
  6. lordmarcovan

    lordmarcovan Eclectic & Eccentric Moderator

    I concur. The horse said it more succinctly than I did.
     
    eddiespin likes this.
  7. Collecting Nut

    Collecting Nut Borderline Hoarder

    I wouldn’t have it graded.
     
  8. Rheingold

    Rheingold Well-Known Member

    I see a nice MS63
     
  9. Clawcoins

    Clawcoins Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Aug 8, 2022
  10. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    I’d be ok with anything between 58 and 64 on this example. At 64, I’d call it on the low end though. These coins do come less than ideal. I’ve passed on a ton over the years because of a few too many nicks or something else distracting. You just have to keep looking until the right example pops up (and I’m not saying the XF 45 I posted is a perfect example-I just liked it enough at that grade level to pull the trigger).
     
  11. Publius2

    Publius2 Well-Known Member

    The various responses are interesting since they do vary somewhat but one theme does unite them: No one presents a full-throated and unqualified defense of the MS-64 grade.

    I agree with @eddiespin that the coin is pretty clean of nicks and dings. I also agree that this coin would not slide from AU-58 to a 60 or 62. It's too clean for that. Were it not for the "rubs" that I see, I would give it a solid 64. So, let me mark up the photo of the obverse to show what is concerning me and why I passed on this coin. The areas I've hi-lighted all show what, to me, look like rubs on the luster. If that is indeed what they are, then this coin would, by technical grading standards, be a circulated coin.

    Now, I may be too tough on this coin. That's why I posted it - I wanted to check my judgement. So, I don't mind a contrary opinion, in fact I'm soliciting it.

    1926 obv-markup.jpg
     
    eddiespin likes this.
  12. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    Nice coin! The coin is graded MS-64 by PCGS. What anyone here thinks does not matter much but guessing is fun. As long as it stays in that holder its grade is MS-64.
     
    Cheech9712 likes this.
  13. Publius2

    Publius2 Well-Known Member

    True, but not really on point. Which is: If it's over-graded and many buyers recognize it as such, it reduces the size of the potential buyer pool and the price at which potential buyers might agree to buy it.
     
  14. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    These coins were sold at the Expo. My Grandfather bought two for his wife and my father. Most we see were not carefully saved and show a little "rub."

    Unfortunately, the "pool" of folks who actually know how to correctly grade any coin is not huge - in spite of what we all think of our ability. What saves us all is that our opinion of a grade - no matter who graded it - is all that matters TO US ALONE. Add to that, the "pool" of folks who actually know how to grade commercially (up to the minute market value) is also small. That's why a long time ago, someone came up with a great idea...a grading service "crutch" to help protect folks from themselves and crooked dealers/collectors. That is the point. The coin is an MS-64 for all intent and purposes and I don't think the number of folks who would NOT buy that coin as an MS-64 is very large.;)
     
  15. charley

    charley Well-Known Member

    I would have thought that you would have mentioned it is impossible to grade a mint coin from photos, and that doing so with a gold piece is the difficult of the impossible.

    In that vein, the present opinion of a TPG encapsulation stands, and I agree with you. Your comment is on point, since opinions in this thread are based on a photo. My opinion, obviously, but my opinion is in good company, I think.
     
  16. lordmarcovan

    lordmarcovan Eclectic & Eccentric Moderator

    I had this thought as well. So OK, maybe it's low end for 64. Maybe it wouldn't get a green bean sticker. But it's a PCGS MS64.
     
    Cheech9712 likes this.
  17. ksparrow

    ksparrow Coin Hoarder Supporter

    I think lighting plays a big role in evaluating the surfaces, what looks like rub at one angle could look different with a slight change in the lighting direction. I reserve judgement on this one.
     
    green18 and Cheech9712 like this.
  18. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    FLUORESCENT LIGHT :blackeye: is discouraged for coin grading :rage: by the experts :bookworm::cigar: because the coin ALWAYS looks the same o_O and any loss of luster for any reason "pops" right out. :jawdrop: That's why I have always used it in addition to incandescent (75-100W) light. Additionally, it is the ONLY light suitable for coin authentication.

    :D
     
    Rheingold likes this.
  19. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    They got an out, @Publius2, "cabinet rub." When they're really full of themselves, they use "friction," not "rub." The bigger the word, the smarter. There's I'm sure the logic. But it's all right there where you've it circled. And yes, I'll agree, to any discriminating buyer, it stands out like a sore thumb. But at the same time, I'll submit, there are a lot of MS-graded coins like this, and what are you gong to do? It's just how they do these things. Either accept their "out," or don't.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2022
  20. KBBPLL

    KBBPLL Well-Known Member

    Ha, now that you mention it, the phrase "cabinet rub" is a bit hokey. I guess we're supposed to conjure up images of a fancy mahogany coin cabinet, a wealthy collector in his velvet bathrobe in the study, cigar in hand, lovingly sliding his prized coins around. I want that one!
     
    AdamL and Publius2 like this.
  21. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    That's what I always think of. :)
     
    KBBPLL likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page