Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="GDJMSP, post: 622521, member: 112"]Not so old, that coin was graded between late '99 and March 2000. And I would agree with the grade assigned by them. I think that in recent years people have fallen into the trap of making too many allowances for weakly struck coins. It is all to easy to recognize a coin like this as being weakly struck and then forget to judge the severity of the wear on the well struck areas in order to arrive at a proper grade. Instead, people tend to attribute the severity of wear in the well struck areas as being due to the weak strike as well thus over-grading them. IMO, the truly misleading part of this coin are a few of the leaves in the lower right of the rev. They tend to make you think that the coin has more detail. But if you examine the the rest of the rev closely, the bow, leaves and legends (in particular AMERICA), the amount of wear present becomes more evident. And on the obv it is patently obvious, to me anyway, for the coin was weakly struck on the left side only and yet significant wear is evident in the center (the high point) and the right side. I think this coin was correctly graded by ANACS for those reasons.[/QUOTE]