Guess the grade #46

2010- NGC slabbed

NOTE: If you don't vote in the poll, your vote will not be counted

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

63 because of all the rub on the obverse and reverse. Or are those flow marks?

On another note, why in the world would you purchase one or get one graded?

 

Why? - Because I am running a registry set. Believe me, they were not expensive.

 

WOW, I've gotten better ones myself in pocket change, if that is higher than 64's, I must be pulling 70's

 

I agree, I just got 3 in my change that look way better than that!

 

65 but I dont think it should be.

That forhead and bottom of the obv has what maybe a counting wheel scratch.

 

63+2+MS65 RD

Could this be a future woody? How could it be? But the graining is right.

 

I'd like to say 63,, but I always go low, so +1.... and I've seen some pretty cruddy current memorials in high grade slabs, so +1 there too.... and I think pcgs and ngc automatically give anyone paying ~$30 to slab a 1 cent coin with no collector value a +1 on thier final grade... soooo,, 63+3 = MS66

 

FWIW, my guess is that they paid $7.50 for that slab. Not too sure about the shipping, though.

 

Mine are MS66 and much better looking than that one. I went with MS65 (because it is NGC). TC

 

shouldn't be higher than a 64 in my eyes.

 

Okay - I relunctantly voted and yes I guessed at this puppy. I think I agree with Doug on this one. The first coin you have posted that I really did not like. Not because of the year but because of all the scrapes and spotting. I think you need to upgrade this one.

 

HAHAHAHAHA....nothing like an ultra modern to screw up everone. People are likely going to be surprized by this grade. Like I've said many times before....LUSTER LUSTER LUSTER....TPG's generally ignore everything else if the coin shines. Also, since 2009, the TPG's are putting a LOT of weight on black water spots. A coin can have dings all over the place, but if there's almost no water spots they give it a 67. I have several graded that way.

66 but I wouldn't be shocked if it was a 67+.

 

I rushed too much or I would not have put this one in. The only part of an explanation you are going to get is that it is not post mint.

 

So correct(about the modern part) - sounds like this will be another ouchie on my record.

 

I certainly do not grade that way Doug. Hits are my number one criteria, end of story. I start at 70 and countdown the grade based on the number and severity of hits, then I consider spotting, luster and strike and reduce accordingly. On this coin my personal grade is around 63/64.

The "damage" your counting (I think) is a classic phenomenon of modern cents. When the die is partially filled and the design is not fully brought-up, you see those flat areas on the device high points. Most often in Zincolns its around the top of the head in the hair. They are usually very scratchy looking because the planchet has not been fully coined and details are lost. For some reason in 2009 the Denver issues really showed this effect. Most notably around the entire rim on the obverse, you see a like "staring" pattern on most of the coins.

 

I cannot prove it, but I also suspect that what you are seeing came from the planchet. If you follow the lines on the bust going to your left, there are more lines just as the rim affects start. I can only conclude that those lines were on the planchet to begin with and have just not been pressed out during the minting. How about a guess that the gap was not properly set during the minting process resulting in the planchet not being squeezed enough to press everything out?

As for grading, I more or less agree with Thad. However, the number is not so important as whether or not I like it. In this case, I will likely replace it when the prices settle in.