Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;messydesk, post: 2428151, member: 1765&quot;]True story:&nbsp; Last year at the ANA summer seminar, we were looking through the ANA&#039;s collection for coins for the class.&nbsp; One was an 1878 8TF Morgan dollar that had been graded Unc details, cleaned by NGC.&nbsp; It wasn&#039;t very attractive, and had darkish toning on it.&nbsp; We thought it was an unattractive proof.&nbsp; The first part of the week we gathered opinions from various experts in the field, including grading instructors, other instructors, industry experts that were on site, all of whom examined the coin in hand, and there was no consensus among the 12-15 opinions we had.&nbsp; Later, we consulted with a few people about dipping the coin, since it was in a &quot;nothing to lose by trying&quot; holder, and there was general agreement that it was appropriate in this case.&nbsp; We then showed as many of the same people as we could, at which time there was pretty unanimous opinion that the coin was a proof and might even grade 62 or 63 (although I think there was one expert who thought it was tooled -- we thought he was nuts).&nbsp; ANA sent it to NGC and it is now graded PR63.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>My point?&nbsp; This coin was shown to a lot of experts who gave a lot of opinions, some of which changed.&nbsp; Other than the OP, the OP&#039;s coin has been seen by <i>nobody</i> here, <i>nobody</i> on the PCGS board, and <i>nobody </i>on the NGC board.&nbsp; On top of that, most people who commented, myself included, are not and haven&#039;t been professional graders.&nbsp; To expect anything but a smattering of grade estimates before grading and reactions to the results afterward is folly.&nbsp; If this coin grades next time, it wouldn&#039;t be unprecedented.[/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