Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Leadfoot, post: 624537, member: 2972&quot;]I think you&#039;re missing my point, and won&#039;t belabor it other than to say this:&nbsp;&nbsp; The point is that on these coins the area of the drapery gets worn down in a very regular fashion, not necessarily corresponding on how the TPGs grade them (see my response below for an explanation of this point).</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Said simply, because TPGs grade non-lustrous circulated copper often by the details grade, not the &quot;wear&quot; grade. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>A fair question, but I think you&#039;re taking my words slightly out of context.&nbsp; In other threads, and to the best of my knowledge, I&#039;ve stated that strike is <i>rarely</i> taken into account by the TPGs when it comes to grading.&nbsp; I believe the last few times we&#039;ve discussed it we were talking about <i>mint state coins</i>, particularly moderns.&nbsp; What we are seeing here is how they take into account a weak strike on a circulated coin that was normally weakly struck -- quite a different animal.&nbsp; As an aside, I seem to recall discussing this issue once before when I posted my 1821 large cent in a guess the grade thread.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I explained my rationale in the PCGS thread:&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p><i>&quot;From a TPG perspective, that coin probably has XF wear, but VF or F details, so <b>I suspect NGC graded it closer to the details than the wear and guess VF 20.</b>&quot;</i></p><p><br /></p><p>Said a bit differently, the TPGs often grade circulated coins in this grade range (say XF-VF, particularly those that lack luster) on their details rather than their wear.&nbsp; In contrast, if this coin were a mint state coin or even AU coin with significant luster left, the TPGs often use the luster to grade the coin. </p><p><br /></p><p>Don&#039;t ask me to justify or rationalize it because other than to say &quot;the TPGs rank or price coins&quot; I don&#039;t have a real good answer -- I simply am making observations, having looked at many thousands of slabbed pieces of copper.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I understood you the first time, and I am not suggesting that uneven wear doesn&#039;t occur, but in this case I believe you are mistaking strike deficiencies for wear....</p><p><br /></p><p>I contend this coin has seen little circulation but suffers from an uneven strike.&nbsp; I offer as the lack of wear on the drapery as proof that the coin didn&#039;t see circulation.&nbsp; I offer the Heritage archives as proof that this coin is found with weak strikes:&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://coins.ha.com/common/search_results.php?Ne=304&amp;Ntt=1807&amp;Ntk=SI_Titles&amp;Ns=Time|1&amp;N=51+790+231+306" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://coins.ha.com/common/search_results.php?Ne=304&amp;Ntt=1807&amp;Ntk=SI_Titles&amp;Ns=Time|1&amp;N=51+790+231+306" rel="nofollow">http://coins.ha.com/common/search_results.php?Ne=304&amp;Ntt=1807&amp;Ntk=SI_Titles&amp;Ns=Time|1&amp;N=51+790+231+306</a></p><p><br /></p><p>Even Walter Breen states when discussing the LDS of this variety &quot;On many of the unusual weak strikes this crumbling [above LI] is hard to see.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>So if you think the coin has seen significant circulation, enough to exhibit uneven and/or significant wear, please explain to me one thing -- how does the drapery have practically no wear whatsoever?</p><p><br /></p><p>Respectfully...Mike[/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