Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;rld14, post: 510261, member: 16133&quot;]Nope, I have the same pics.&nbsp; I didn&#039;t see the rub on the original pics that Paul posted, and regardless, I wouldn&#039;t be shocked if it came back in a 63 holder if cracked and resubmitted, I have sent in AU SLQs and had them come back as MS.</p><p><br /></p><p>FH does not equal well struck either.&nbsp; SLQs are funny like that, I have seen coins where the head is full and the center of Liberty is so mushy and weakly struck that you can&#039;t see the line at the top of her right leg, and on the other hand, I have seen really sharply struck coins with concave heads.&nbsp; IMO too much attention is paid on stupid FH designations and people don&#039;t give the whole coin a good enough look, I have a &quot;tough&quot; date SLQ that&#039;s not an FH, it&#039;s close but no cigar (80-85%) but the rest of the coin is razor sharp and really a monster of a strike.&nbsp; It&#039;s better struck than any FH I have seen of the same date.</p><p><br /></p><p>I added this pic to illustrate what I&#039;m talking about, see, this coin is slabbed as a FH, but there&#039;s a LOT of these SLQs that are slabbed as FHs that are not true FHs.&nbsp; While this coin may technically qualify, you can EASILY find a 17-P Type 1 with a MUCH sharper head.&nbsp; Ruben found an absolutely monster gem of a 17-P FH that, if posted next to this coin, would blow it away.</p><p><br /></p><p>On the pic I attached, look at the head, it&#039;s arguably a FH, but there&#039;s plenty of much better ones.&nbsp; Now look at the Shield, I have a PCGS VF30 example with a better shield.&nbsp; Also the torso is weak, and the gate on the right side of the coin that I highlighted is weakly struck.&nbsp; This is just from a quick glance.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in