Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 870047, member: 112&quot;]He knows the grades because he cheated - he went an looked them up. Gotta give give him credit for being honest about it though. :thumb:</p><p><br /></p><p>Yes, all 4 coins made it into slabs. All 4 were graded by the same TPG - PCGS. All 4 coins were graded F12. If you aren&#039;t surprised yet, you should be.</p><p><br /></p><p>There have been several comments that these coins all should be graded differently because of the the various varieties, this variety is better struck than that one and so on. Well there&#039;s a small problem with that. </p><p><br /></p><p>For one thing, once a coin is worn to a certain point quality of strike has very little to do with the condition of the coin. While a weakly struck coin can exhibit weakness in various different areas of the coin, typically weak strike tends to affect the higher points most often. And with considereable wear, wear to the VF point or lower, most of the high points are worn down smooth. Remaining detail is typically composed of the lower points of the coin. To see this for your, with these coins, all you have to do is look up higher grades of the same variety. Many of the varieties exist in MS grades. I guess my point is, people tend to make too much of these grading allowances for different varieties with coins like these. Using that to explain the wide variation in grades that these coins often receive.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now if you think I&#039;m wrong, or trying to justify my conservativism when it comes to grading - consider this. In the order I posted them - coins #1 &amp; #2 are the exact same variety - B1, BB21. Now go look at the coins again. </p><p><br /></p><p>If you cannot agree that there is no way that these two coins should not be graded the same, then I&#039;ll eat my hat ! And be aware, coin #2 has the CAC sticker on it as well. Here are the links for the first 2 coins - </p><p><a href="http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=428&amp;Lot_No=2217#photo" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=428&amp;Lot_No=2217#photo" rel="nofollow">Coin #1</a> - <a href="http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1125&amp;Lot_No=907#photo" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1125&amp;Lot_No=907#photo" rel="nofollow">Coin #2</a></p><p><br /></p><p>Same comments I made above apply to coins #3 &amp; #4 as well, they are both the exact same variety - B5, BB27. Here are the links for them - <a href="http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1130&amp;Lot_No=802#photo" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1130&amp;Lot_No=802#photo" rel="nofollow">Coin #3</a> - <a href="http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1138&amp;Lot_No=1165#photo" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1138&amp;Lot_No=1165#photo" rel="nofollow">Coin #4</a> </p><p><br /></p><p>All of this said, in my opinion each one of these coins has legitmate reasons for being body-bagged. Were they anything but early dollars I doubt that any of them would have been slabbed. </p><p><br /></p><p>#1 has a major scratch on the obv, and no, that is not an adjustment mark. The reverse has 2 cuts in it that would stop other coins from being graded. And if you look closely at the blowups, you can see the signs of an old harsh cleaning.</p><p><br /></p><p>#2 While an argument can be made that the scratches across the center of the neck are adjustment marks, I have my doubts that they are given the spacing and tapering angles of the lines. But the scratch in the forelock, below the eye, behind the eye, the one running from the eye down across the cheek, the 3 scrathes behind the hair, and the vertical scratch just behind the ear - these combined would definitely stop other coins from being graded. And the coin has some minor pitting and corrosion.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now here&#039;s a question for you - as I told you above, #2 has the CAC sticker, green - meaning the coin is an A or B coin - good for the grade. What do you suppose would happen if coin #1 were submitted to CAC ? If green means good for the grade, and gold means possible upgrade - would they have to come up with a new platinum sticker for this coin or what ? </p><p><br /></p><p>This coin also illustrates what I have said before, CAC is a good idea, but they follow the same basic grading standards that the TPGs do. They (CAC) may fine tune the grades a bit, but they ignore the same issues, the same problems and follow the same baisc grading principles that the TPGs follow.</p><p><br /></p><p>#3 The obverse has a large scratch down across the cheek, another in the hair, yet another in the field in front of the chin, and some lighter ones on the neck and through the lower hair. It also has some minor corrosion and very light pitting.</p><p><br /></p><p>The reverse shows more severe corrosion and pitting. There is a sizable gouge in the eagle&#039;s breast, several rim dings and minor cuts in the denticles, and scratch from the bottom of the breast down across the leg. A lesser coin would be body bagged almost instantly.</p><p><br /></p><p>#4 has obviously been harshly cleaned. The tell tale scratches are plainly obviious. And there are 2 significant scratches, one in front of the face between the stars and another from the eye into the hair. The reverse has some light scrathes across the right side wing, but ither than what looks like an old cleaning and subsequent re-toning it looks OK. Either way, these things would bag most coins.</p><p><br /></p><p>But yet none of these coins were bagged, they were all graded.</p><p><br /></p><p>And I purposely chose these coins since all we have are pictures to go by for this discussion. I didn&#039;t want any comments of - the pictures aren&#039;t showing the luster, those are digital artifacts, those are planchet flaws, the coin undoubtably looks better in hand, the graders are better at this than we are and have the coins in hand so they must be right. They are different varieties and they are graded differently.</p><p><br /></p><p>These coins are what they are. The pictures accurately represent the coins. There are no hidden attributes that we can&#039;t see that conveinetly provide an excuse for the grade. These are well worn coins. Coins that most of us would kill to be able own just as they are regardless of what slab says. </p><p><br /></p><p>But what the slabs say to me is - where is the consitency ? Where is the justification ? What kind of standards are you using anyway ? Why can this coin be harshly cleaned and still slabbed ?</p><p><br /></p><p>And by the way fish - I was amazed :bow:[/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