GtG PCGS Columbian

58. overgraded 64. look at Paddy54's and compare

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Hence, "AU-64." That "grade" could only have come from market grading.

 

Wow, a lot of harsh grading. I'm with @physics-fan3.14, I think it's accurate. I see the areas that your guys are referring to, but this series can be a bit difficult to grade from photos. Also just because those areas are a bit lighter, does not mean wear. Now if the images showed luster right around a dull area, then sure AU. I just don't see PCGS grading this a 64 if in fact it was AU. If it was a slider, I could see the nod to 62 possibly 63 for the color, but not 64.

 

The initial pictures appear to have portrayed it harshly. Seeing the last picture you can see there is luster present and appears to be graded accurately

 

At the risk of appearing stupider than I usually do (maybe). Is the flatness of the hair usual for this coin? What about the apparent rubbing of the eyebrow and parts of the lapel...help me to learn.

 

The hairs pretty flat on them. You can find ones with better struck hair, but you can also find a lot that have a much poorer strike

 

Your not stupid and you don't sound stupid. This coin can be a tough one to grade from photo's. I've seen a lot that just look like crap in terms of lack of luster and poorly struck.

Take a guess at what this one graded.

 

The high points are going to incur the coin contact, too, in the bags. Wear can be differentiated because wear is smoother. That's basically it in a nut.

 

I'll disagree there. "AU-64" is alive and well, and it's symptomatic of market grading, i.e., of setting the grade based on what the market will swallow. @jtlee321, you have to go back and look in our threads on these freak market grades; these threads are probably before you got here, from my recollection, anyway. In fact, they even from time to time give damaged coins straight grades, and those aren't "mistakes" like we like to rationalize they are, but deliberate.

 

That is not how they grade and you should know that....

 

This pretty boy is all there. He's a high gem.

 

Here; educate yourself. PCGS's definition of the "market grading" they're doing: "A numerical grade that matches the grade at which a particular coin generally is traded in the marketplace. The grading standard used by PCGS." https://www.pcgs.com/Lingo/M"

 

How many coins have you submitted to them? How about for grading in general in the last 2 years?

 

I have a better question. Why don't you admit you were just flat-out wrong?

 

So none?

 

This question seems irrelevant to the conversation. He could submit 1,000 or zero, it doesn't change PCGS's grading standards; which he provided. His conclusion is drawn from evidence. I'm seeing some fallacies of "moving goalposts", "cherrypicking" and/or "appeal to self evident truth" (that last one people use all too often). If you truly believe you are correct, you should be able to demonstrate so by responding to and disproving the evidence provided. I personally do not care one way or the other on who is correct, I just ask that people who enter into debate avoid fallacies and debate evidence so those of us who are reading can learn something. Frankly, I think this argument is a waste of time and space on this thread.

 

Well once again not knocking the op coin. If I was in the market for this specimen I would care less the number on the slab and more so about the coin in the slab,as to eye appeal , luster, and any other issue be they a positive or negative about the coin in question.
As far as grading being subjective that's the key word subjective. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and mine is sweet coin that's to my eye an Au. Grade. No one could convince me otherwise , Time and time again there's been coins posted here either graded above or below their true grades,coins posted a straight grade that should of been a detailed grade,and coins given a detailed grade that don't deserve the detail grade.
As long as the op is happy with his specimen then nothing else should matter.

 

To me, the hair looks more defined, but I see a few contact marks. The fields, particularly on the reverse look nice and I do like the toning. I'll guess MS64.

 

I know a lot was discussed on this subject matter long before I got here. I have only been here for just over 2 years. I will concede that there is still a lot for me to learn. I have no doubts about market grading and grading error's or intentional mis-grading. Hell, I see it all the time, most notably on Heritage.

Frankly, however, the only thing that will convince me 100% on the OP's coin would be a video of the coin under a good light showing the breaks in the luster. I see exactly which areas are being referred to. If I was in the market for a coin like this, then in hand inspection would either seal or kill the deal for me. To me photo's only open the purchasing possibility door.

As long as @DysfunctionalVeteran is happy with his coin and HE agrees with it's assigned grade, that should be all that matters. I would think that if and when he sells it, the potential buyer would also have to agree with the grade.

 

It is a PCGS MS-67. @eddiespin you nailed it.