Gobrecht must have been in his cups and the bozos at the mint who approved the design obviously needed glasses or maybe "payola"?
The reveal. People were split on this coin. I agree that it is a details coin-overdipped. ANACS got that right. I don’t agree that it is a circulated coin. I think it was a cleaned uncirculated coin, and they should have gone MS details.
AU...details to me...at least been wiped/rubbed...based on today's TPG "standards"...but have seen sliders get by with older coins, so may depend...again...on TPG service, the graders, day/time, their moods, et al. IMO, this is one of those nice, decent coins that should NOT be relegated to a "details" slab, but simply reflected in a straight grade...if otherwise AU58 as an example, then down to maybe 53 or even 50, etc.
It is the one details US coin I own. I have other seated halves that have the same issue—either dipped, or wiped. They are in AU straight graded slabs, despite minor problems. This one is actually in nicer condition than others I have posted. The distinction is often blurred by TPGs, and they are quite inconsistent. I am contemplating cracking it out, and see if PCGS will give it a straight low MS, or net grade AU. Nothing to lose, as it is already a details coin.
I'll go with 62. It looks cleaned but a nice looking cleaned, if there is such a thing. And I never noticed that about the figure of Liberty. Now I'll never be able to unsee it.
I think it would be wasted money to try and cross it for a straight grade. It is so obviously cleaned/polished, that maybe only a basement slabber would straight grade it.
The coin looks messed with in your photos...so my guess is they will details grade it. But, all you are out is the grading fee so I don't think there is a huge risk there. In hand if it looks like other Seated coins that are straight graded I'd say go for it.
Here is an obviously cleaned/ dipped Seated Half that straight graded. It is in a similar situation as the originally posted coin