Doug's - Guess the grade

Thanks for the clarification. YOu just got me a bit confused (easy to do!).

What's the reverse of that coin look like? I'm still a bit skeptical that little scratch would cause a bag or an NCS holder.

Said a bit differently, given all the leeway TPGs show these coins, it seems rather odd to suggest that coin was bagged for such a small and inconspicuous scratch -- heck its not even visible in the full-slab shot you posted in the preceding post.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm not questioning you -- I believe you -- if I'm questioning anyone, it's NGC.

Don't take it so personal, my friend.

 

I don't cheat.
Coin #1 appears to have luster.
I see no luster on coin #2.
I would (market) grade coin #1 higher because of that.
But as we all know, pictures can be deceiving.

 

p.s. but from techincal/details perspective clearly coin #2 wins -- but that's not how TPGs grade, IMO.

 

p.p.s. one of the things I find truly challenging with these early silver pieces is all the net/market grading that goes on with them. Coins that have the appearances of much higher grades get knocked down for "problems" that would normally cause a bodybag. IMO, that's the phenomenon that led to the coins GDJMSP posted being such different grade apparently yet all graded the same -- and the same thing that I suspect caused a similar phenomenon in the two latest coins posted -- and not so much any sliding grading scale or huge inconsistency. Having had the opportunity to speak to a few graders and long-time collectors, this view has been reinforced over the past few years as my type set moves into these early coins (which I find, frankly, quite intimidating for this very reason).

 

It's not obvious to me.

What do you think the reason is?

 

I'm not so confident that I can draw that conclusion from pictures. Not saying that you're necessarily wrong, but rather that I have enough trouble figuring out these coins in my own two hands, much less in photos.

The market will look past problems in early coins that it would never look past in a more modern coin.

Now you can take the democratic view that damage is damage no matter the coin, but in reality the market doesn't view a chain cent with a touch of corrosion the same as it does a memorial Lincoln with the same problem.

And we all know that TPGs take the market into account (or at least their observations on the market) when assigning grades or deciding if a coin is going to be bagged or not.

 

p.s. and let's remember that TPGs don't really "grade" coins, they "price" or "rank" them based on the market. I know you know this, but many reading this may not -- I know it took me quite a while for me to recognize this numismatic truth.

 

I'm probably stating the obvious, but, it seems that the more rare the issue, the more lenient the TPG'er is in regard to that issue.....

 

Just to extend the discussion a bit, have a look at this one for sale on eBay, PCGS VF20, and see how it compares with the coins in the o.p. Opinions?
http://cgi.ebay.com/1795-Flowing-Ha...em&pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item3eef4be536

 

Sorry I missed this thread.

 

The very first coin in the thread, this one http://www.cointalk.com/attachments/73965d1271981140-fh-2-obv.jpg
I almost have never disagreed on a grade so much before in my life. So far, to the point, that Doug, I think you are trying to pull wool over our eyes. That coin is easily an XF coin, albeit, a horrible strike. That is my opinion, take it how you will. But I bet dollars to donuts that coin is not in a VF-20 slab.

 

Sorry, snaz. The coin is in a F-12 slab. See here. It is also listed other places in this thread.

 

Well.. That's wrong. What is a common sell price for an F-12?
Because that hair has ALOT of detail. I stand by my first comment.

EDIT TO ADD:
So... I was right..? Not in a VF-20 slab?

 

On that point you are 111% correct!

 

Ok, but I'm serious, I think that coin is leaps and bounds ahead of the rest. Doug? Where are you? I want your opinion! I want everyones opinion!