Elements of Grading Part 2

Saw this coin in an upcoming Heritage Auction.

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=28124&Lot_No=24020

Given the recent thread in this forum on the weighting of grading elements and whether one or more great elements can outweigh a negative (in regard to the MS67 Peace Dollar), I wanted to get the forum's view on this coin. Granted it is at the other end of the grading spectrum. Key date. Certified F15, which means that the obverse should be well formed with details in the hair, or according to the grading standards, "moderate to heavy wear. Entire design is clear and bold." Just struggling with the obverse on this coin. Seems that the grade was given based on the reverse, but I have always thought that the obverse is more important for the grade. Just wanting to learn from you guys with this as an example. I would have graded the obverse AG-3 or at best G4. Reverse may grade F-12, 15, but total coin would be reduced to VG 8?? Your opinions?
John

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I thought grading was done by the worst side and a G coin has full rims?

 

GD, thanks for the reply. So I feel good that I would have graded it properly by ANA standards. So forgive my naivete, and this is really where I am trying to up my grading skills.

So PCGS is really not grading the coin based on ANA standards, they are assigning a market level grade based on supply/demand, rarity, price points, etc? I guess I never really knew that was going on.

If this is true, it has really opened my eyes as to grading.
John

 

I have actually seen it stated that this date should be graded "based on the reverse" - because the obverse die was so messed up. Of course, I cannot find it now. Regardless, coins are grade adjusted for the typical strike for that date (i.e. New Orleans minted Morgans, etc). Well, this is the ultimate poorly struck date. The details are missing because of the strike, not because of wear.

 

RLM, Understand what you are saying about grading on the reverse, but that is not what I thought I understood GD saying. I didn't think the TPGs were, as GD said, "raising the assigned grade because of the rarity and value of the coin....the coin actually does grade AG or G - but the value is F15 money, so they grade it F15." This is similar to the discussion on the Peace Dollar. Are they grading the coin independently of its worth, rarity, etc, based on an agreed upon standard, or are they really grading to a market value. Guess it has just hit me!
John

 

My understanding for THAT coin is that they are grading it based on the wear - not based on the details left. Many no "D"'s weak reverse have no wheat lines on an uncirculated coin. Is that coin going to be called VG red?

 

One thing though, and this is just my opinion. The Peace Dollar was a poorly struck example of the date. I can't remember the date, but a strike of that quality is not common for any Peace Dollar date. Therefore, that coin should be down graded IMHO because of that. If the coin is known to be poorly struck for a particular date, I feel that the strike quality shouldn't be as big of a grade determining factor. 1922 Lincoln's are known for having a horrible strike. That is the norm. If a really nicely struck 1922 is out there (and there is surely some) it would command a substantial premium. There are coins where you must take the specific characteristics of that date into consideration when grading...and a 1922 Lincoln is one of them.

 

Actually, if it were well struck, it would be a counterfeit. Since there are only 4 die pairs recognized, all have the same detail or lack thereof.

 

I have a question for GDJMSP. I've occasionally seen certified coins that appear to have made the grade they were given on all the technical aspects, but were failing in the eye appeal category so bad I wonder how they got their grade. I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but isn't eye appeal in grading at least an equal factor in grade determination?

 

I meant a 1922 dated coin. My understanding is the 1922-D was generally poorly struck across the board, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

Yes, there are some descent struck 1922-D's out there. Just look at Arizonajack's avatar or my pics below. Well struck 22-D's are hard to find, but I don't thing they are the hardest.

 

What caused the 4 dies to not have the D mint mark? Where they Philly dies that were sent to Denver that didn't have the D added...or where they simply so old that the D disappeared...or something else?

 

Courtesy of lincolncentresource.com. they have a good article on the 1922 no "D" cents. http://lincolncentresource.com/1922Ddievarieties.html

 

Thanks for the insight.

So one could ask, then, what good is a "standard". If it really is a standard, albeit, imperfect, then with the 22 no D, since there are only "4 die pairs" and "all have the same detail or lack thereof", one would simply grade the coins on the standard, and since none of them would grade high due to the weak strike on the obverse, they would receive their grade based on the same standard that other coins were graded on. HOWEVER, that would/should have NO impact on the price of the coin. If all 22No Ds were rated AG, G, VG, for example, based on the grading standard, but if the coins, even in that grade, were rare, the basics of supply and demand would drive the market price. So a 22D, VG would sell for significantly more than a VF15 or Au55 of some other, less rare coin (as is the case). This is what is confusing to me regarding grading standards and the TPGs.
John

 

Wow, great information. Here's a question for you then (and I must admit I haven't read the article yet)...what would dies 1, 3 and 4 be so prone to grease filling? We see grease filling today...it's not that uncommon. But, it seems like it doesn't plague the minting process. What about these 3 dies made them so prone to grease filling?

Also, I knew there were 4 dies before...but what I'm wondering is there a preference for different dies? Is one considered more desirable/rare/valuable?

 

Each is graded separate and distinct from each other because each have somewhat different details. i.e., there are 4 sets of standards to grade the coins on. Again, they are graded on how much wear they have, not how much detail is left. To grade them, you have to be familiar with each die pair. Again, look at http://lincolncentresource.com/1922Ddievarieties.html

 

I do not know that they were so prone to becoming grease filled. It only happened once (supposedly) for each pair. And then think about it a minute. It might have happened 1000's of times for just the Lincolns in other years, but how would you know. 1922 was the only year that no Lincolns were made in Philadelphia.

 

ABSOLUTELY - look at the prices for die #2