When I saw you posting a bunch of gtg threads using Heritage photos, I assumed your goal was to in some way expose what you consider to be the inconsistencies of the grading system employed by the TPGs. Now, I have no idea what you are trying to do. You don't collect chain cents, and more to the point, I doubt if you have ever even seen one in hand, much less a high grade example like the one shown here. The TPGs know far more about these coins than you do and my guess is that you are going to embarrass yourself with your commentary in this thread. Now that I have that off my chest, let me try to grade a coin from a series that I don't collect, have never seen one in hand, from an overexposed Heritage beauty shot. Using just fundamental numismatic grading skills with no knowledge of the series, I grade the coin XF45. There is wear on the highpoints of the coin but it is not enough to really impact the details of the design. The fields also show wear and seem not to have any real luster.
I've see dozens of chain cents, including a few in the VF/EF range. The high-grade ones were at Chris McCawley's table when I visited him at the ANA National Money show back in 2013 (I think, maybe 2014).
Oh, my bad, you saw some chain cents at a coin show. Did you also stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night? Once again, you completely miss my point. I'm about done with indulging your insolence.
Lehigh96, posted: "When I saw you posting a bunch of gtg threads using Heritage photos, I assumed your goal was to in some way expose what you consider to be the inconsistencies of the grading system employed by the TPGs. Now, I have no idea what you are trying to do. You don't collect chain cents, and more to the point, I doubt if you have ever even seen one in hand, much less a high grade example like the one shown here. The TPGs know far more about these coins than you do and my guess is that you are going to embarrass yourself with your commentary in this thread." Why the preamble? Do you two have a problem with each other? The OP posted a photo. Originally, I thought the coins were his. So it appears this is a simple GTG. So take a guess. That's all that's going to be posted here - guesses as most of us are not qualified to put a commercial grade/value on it. I'm not and you say in the next paragraph that you are not either. Besides, the coin is already graded by folks who are qualified to value it and they back up their opinion with a guarantee of sorts. "Now that I have that off my chest, let me try to grade a coin from a series that I don't collect, have never seen one in hand, from an overexposed Heritage beauty shot. Using just fundamental numismatic grading skills with no knowledge of the series, I grade the coin XF45. There is wear on the highpoints of the coin but it is not enough to really impact the details of the design. The fields also show wear and seem not to have any real luster." It took a while but now your talking! IMHO, you would make a great commercial grader and I'll bet the coin is graded 45 at the least! It is a very attractive piece. That said, I should not be shocked if that corroded , scratched-up piece were not graded as a "commercial" AU-50. PS I know you hate faces and color but I had to get through the first part of your post so consider this pay-back.
The preamble was warranted. He didn't like the way the discussion in another thread that turned on him, so he went to Heritage to find a whole bunch of ultra rarities and posted the "beauty shots" for people to engage in guess the grade threads. There are only a handful of members on Cointalk who I would trust to grade these coins, and neither you, me, or TypeCoin fall into that group. What do you think his motive is in these threads? It is plainly obvious that he intends to divulge the grades of these coins, and then trash the assigned grades by the TPGs. The problem is that he has no idea what he is talking about, and I have no problem communicating that to the rest of this forum.
NGC called this AU-53. I included two pieces of early copper because Heritage's EAC expert gives an EAC grade, which was VF-35. EAC grading is ultra conservative and is often at odds with TPG grades (sometimes even lower than mine). For my grade, I noticed there was no luster left, which precluded this coin being an AU, but there was a lot of detail in the hair. I said XF. Guess what @Lehigh96, we agreed on the grade. This coin sold for $88,000, which is in line with XF for this variety.
@Lehigh96 and @TypeCoin971793 From what I have seen it the past year, both of you are very informed and valuable posters for all of us! Nevertheless, I HATE BOTH OF YOU ... Only kidding, got to protect the reputation. To continue... "What do you think his motive is in these threads? It is plainly obvious that he intends to divulge the grades of these coins, and then trash the assigned grades by the TPGs. The problem is that he has no idea what he is talking about, and I have no problem communicating that to the rest of this forum." We all know many people disagree with grades assigned by the TPGS. The "Godfather" around here is probably one of their biggest detractors. I may be a little more forgiving. IMO, the simple purpose of any GTG is to GTG. The fun begins after the guesses begin and members argue their reasons. That's a good teaching method. Ever been in an advanced grading seminar when the two instructors disagreed with each other about one of the coins in the grading set? No foul, its all just reasoned opinion and some opinions are "better" (as in closer to the assigned grade on the label assuming it is correct). Whatever is on the label is not going to change the opinion of most qualified professionals. And you are correct, what any of us here think of the grade does not matter in the big picture. As long as Type disagrees with a grade and can back it up, he will be educating us. I can call that large cent corroded all day long and prove it; however, I will be the first to tell every one reading this thread that the coin is attractive, high grade, and very desirable for the type. Its surface is really not that bad for one of these coins. It's "market acceptable" and no fool will call it corroded except me. EDIT: I just saw your post with the grade. Remember, I learned to grade decades ago. My personal grade was VF the first time I saw it. It is the poster child for a Sheldon VF. Unfortunately, this old-timey grading is DEAD. IMHO, the entire EAC group has missed the boat and is just causing confusion in the market. Nevertheless, I understand their reasoning. It is their club and they can set the rules between each other. I highly recommend their recently published grading guide. Funny thing though, They are not crazy over there. Grade the coin VF and price it as an XF/AU. EVERYONE SHOULD BE HAPPY as it makes perfect sense to me.
