Guess The Grade: JFK Halves

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by ndgoflo, Jan 7, 2005.

Page 2 of 2
  1. ndgoflo

    ndgoflo Senior Member


    That is one of the biggest problems with grading today. Who cares how it was produced, if the dies are worn, weak strikes, etc. If that is the case it should detract from the grade. An O mint Morgan should be graded the exact same way an S mint or any other mint. Because O mint Morgans are notorious for weak strikes, the grades should reflect that.
     
    ndgoflo, Jan 12, 2005
    #21 + Quote Reply
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator


    This isn't a problem of grading today - today's grading methods have nothing to do with it. That part of grading has ALWAYS been that way.

    For example - how could you justify grading two coins the same way when coin A was struck with 45,000 lbs of pressure and coin B was struck with 40,000 lbs of pressure ? You can't for they are not equal. This is why you have to make allowances for year & mint. This also one of the hardest apsects of grading to learn.
     
    GDJMSP, Jan 12, 2005
    #22 + Quote Reply
  4. ndgoflo

    ndgoflo Senior Member


    Maybe I was wrong to say "today". I really have nothing to compare to as I have been in the game less than 10 years.

    But to me, your example is a no brainer. Coin A will more than likely deserve a higher grade than B, UNLESS B has better surface preservation (contact marks), luster, and/or eye appeal to offset the weaker strike.

    With the way you are describing it, no common collector will ever be able to grade, for they would have to acquire thousands of examples of every date and mint mark of any said series just to figure out "was this a good year for the mint?"

    I can see adjusting grading standards from series to series, but within the same series all coins should be grade the same exact way regardless.
     
    ndgoflo, Jan 12, 2005
    #23 + Quote Reply
  5. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator


    No - they do not have to acquire thousands of coins - but they do have to look at thousands & thousands of coins of each series to be able to learn how to grade accurately.

    Grading coins accurately is a learned skill that usually takes many years and great deal of practice to learn. I've known many people who have been collectors over 30 yrs that cannot grade worth a hoot. But that's because they never took the time to learn.
     
    GDJMSP, Jan 12, 2005
    #24 + Quote Reply
  6. ndgoflo

    ndgoflo Senior Member


    That's pretty easy for those who have access to thousands of coins to look at. Everyone knows that pictures in books and on the web aren't very good for this purpose, and for me, the nearest coin shop is at least 2 hours round trip, and that's not counting any time spent in the shop.
     
    ndgoflo, Jan 12, 2005
    #25 + Quote Reply
  7. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator


    That's exactly why most collectors cannot grade coins accurately. And I don't mean that as a cut or slam in any way to anybody. It's just a statement of fact.

    Grading coins is like any other trade - you don't get good at it without study & practice and lots of both.

    But lots of reading and lots of looking at pictures does help and it does teach you how to grade. Yes - you still have to look at coins in your hand to refine your skill.

    This is what makes the grading companies so successful.
     
    GDJMSP, Jan 12, 2005
    #26 + Quote Reply
  8. ndgoflo

    ndgoflo Senior Member

    OK, I'm back. As frustrated as I get with grading, I am really learning alot with all of this. So here goes again. This one has not been slabbed (as if you couldn't tell! :p ) I've got my own idea of what I think it grades, but I would be interested in hearing how you all choose to grade it.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    ndgoflo, Jan 13, 2005
    #27 + Quote Reply
  9. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    What ?? Nobody gonna try this ?
     
    GDJMSP, Jan 13, 2005
    #28 + Quote Reply
  10. Catman

    Catman New Member

    MS-61

    catman
     
    Catman, Jan 13, 2005
    #29 + Quote Reply
  11. susanlynn9

    susanlynn9 New Member

    MS62. There is rub on the cheek that I don't think is wear; I think it is from rubbing against other coins.
     
    susanlynn9, Jan 13, 2005
    #30 + Quote Reply
  12. Catman

    Catman New Member

    I saw that Susan and marked it up as bag rubbing.

    catman
     
    Catman, Jan 14, 2005
    #31 + Quote Reply
  13. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator


    Possible I suppose - and it may even be the picture not really the coin. But it looks to me like the same marks are on the forehead, eyebrow and a couple in the hair. If I am seeing the pic correctly - I think the coin has wear & was found in circulation and I would call it AU50.
     
    GDJMSP, Jan 14, 2005
    #32 + Quote Reply
  14. ndgoflo

    ndgoflo Senior Member

    ...And he doesn't even collect U.S. anymore!! ;) You are right on GD, it was found in circulation (actually, roll searching), and I was thinking more along the lines of AU55. Comparing it to the 69-D, I think it looks better in terms of number of contact marks, and it could very easily fool some to believe that it is MS. (I'm not criticising the grading abilities of Catman or Susan, grading from a digital picture is difficult no matter how good they are, IMO) I think it could fool quite a few people, even if they were holding it in hand. The rub isn't that noticable until you enlarge/magnify it. If it weren't for that bit of rub... :( , what would it grade? I'm thinking 64, with a shot at 65, depending on what kind of day it is :p .
     
    ndgoflo, Jan 14, 2005
    #33 + Quote Reply
  15. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    I would say your estimate is correct ;)
     
    GDJMSP, Jan 15, 2005
    #34 + Quote Reply
Page 2 of 2
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page