I have not done the reveal for this coin yet, I want some of the people I tagged above to respond first. Regarding what constitutes a step, it is the number of complete lines (recessed) +1. The foundation that the columns rest on constitute the first step and below the first recessed line would be the second step. PCGS and NGC have different standards for the FS designation. PCGS will allow shallow marks across the steps as long as the continuity of the steps is not interrupted. NGC is more strict and any mark that traverses one of the lines, no matter how slight, will usually preclude the full step designation.
I guessed, and that's all it is, a guess, MS66 NOT FULL STEPS. And, to me, there in lies the problem with TPG. A few, very few, people are dictating what the entire numismatic community should accept. Well, I don't, but that's just me.
How is that full step. the last 2 steps are merged on the die. I have seen that on my mint set break outs. Yo think, maybe, and then, no way.
We should start our own grading service with crowd sourcing. Put the coin up with a poll. Slab it and grade it according to the votes. It can't be worst that calling that a full step.
Wow, this thread went a little sideways. I guessed 66 not 5FS. It al depends on how deep the ding is under the third pillar.
So the only person who got this right was @capthank, who didn't actually respond in the comments but did vote MS67. @RonSanderson voted MS67 5FS and I agree with him and will likely be submitting this coin for regrade in the near future. As a group, we are pretty much split right down the middle as to whether this coin is full steps or not, but some of those people are applying the standard for 6FS not 5FS. I got this coin at a very reasonable price which will allow me to gamble with the resubmission. Even if it doesn't get 5FS, I will still get a new holder and likely break even on the coin. To me, this presents what we call in poker, a "Freeroll!"