Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Lehigh96, Nov 11, 2019.
As always, comments welcome!
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
I know stars have eluded you although you have a taste for exceptional eye appeal.
This one seems to have kind of a muted luster due to the toning but is relatively clean. I think they bumped it to 65 for the color and it prolly falls short of their standard for a star.
I keep the photos at 1000 x 500 px purposefully. Although it makes evaluating full steps harder, larger images would make minuscule marks seem huge and cause people to undergrade the coins.
Yes, I guess you're right.
It's a little mushy for anything higher. (For me.)
I'm really at the point where I think the graders just forget that the star designation exists.
It does seem so at times. Other times, I’m puzzled what they saw to give a star. I would add that I’d personally like to see the overall threshold for a star to be more strict (for example, no small crescents on Morgans).
I agree that small crescents on Morgans don't deserve stars but I think that coins with light pastel rainbow toning and outstanding luster should be rewarded, and they never are.
I’m not a huge proponent of light pastels getting the star either, but they are more deserving than some that make it.
So you think it is an MS64 but graded MS66? Are you saying they gave it a toning bump? or two?
I have a bunch of other guess the grade threads active right now, feel free to participate and don't forget to vote. Thanks.
Good question. I think without the toning it's a market 65.
@Ana Silverbell can explain the grade.
Separate names with a comma.