No he didn't, he linked their dictionary page of coin terms. My point was that people who seems to think getting high grades is the easiest and that they just sit down and "i.e., of setting the grade based on what the market will swallow." aka put the max possible grade on something are almost always people that have little to no experience grading them. The market grading aspect is a small part of the grading equation and often times you can see it reflected more with holding back coins that would be low end for the next grade up where there is a big jump with the other big impact being what color is acceptable. If the OPs coin was market graded it would be at least a 65. A common 64 for that date is about a 100 dollar coin if that, if that coin went to auction it should sell for much closer to 65 money. The one thing the OPs coins did show very well though is how much the type of picture can impact what grade people will guess. The first pictures had muted luster, the last picture shows the luster pretty well.
Youre telling me THIS is a 64 ???? Look at all those scrapes, cuts, scratches and wear from circulation/mishandling. Look at all the interruptions in the toning and luster 65???? Haaaaa not even close I hate to dog another mans prize coin. Wheres @Insider he will put this to rest (mike diamond style)
We are looking at images. PCGS had the coin in hand. If there were breaks in the luster it would not have been graded a 64. I don't always agree with the services but with this coin I do. The quality of the images in this thread created the differences in opinions.
What's strange to me is I see the effect of what looks to be minor pitting similar to what one might see on a blue and unkempt shotgun.