Guess the Grade Morgan

I think I undergrade Morgans because I like clean surfaces but most Morgans don’t have them and don’t get penalized for it. I started at MS 63* but compensated for my bias and went to MS 64.

Here is another 81-S MS 65 with the clean cheek that I personally prefer. No chance of a color bump on this one.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

These are two vastly different coins.... and show why we need a breakdown of the grades based on each component rather than an overall grade. The luster on your coin is vastly superior. The color/eye appeal on the OP is vastly superior. Your coin has far more contact marks throughout the fields (maybe not on the cheek, but the reverse is nowhere near as clean, and the obverse fields have noticeably more marks). The OP's coin, while it has more marks on the cheek, has less overall marks. (these are all in my opinion, as shouldn't need be mentioned)

By breaking the grading down into Strike, Luster, Eye Appeal, Contact Marks as I do, you can actually see why the coins both graded 65. I honestly believe that 65 is the accurate grade for each of these coins - for significantly different reasons. If you decide which aspects of a coin are more important to you, and which you find more desirable, you can tailor a set to your tastes and likes.

We as collectors have to decide what we prioritize and what we like. We can't have everything - do you prioritize color, luster, strike, clean fields? What balance of these factors produces a coin that speaks to you.

Not all 65's are made equal!

 

I believe the reverse toned 81s is 65* all day.

The OP obverse toned 81s just doesn’t do it for me and I feel there is way more chatter on the cheek, neck, and fields. I think it belongs in a 63* slab. 64* at most. It’s not gem in my eyes.

 

I think the bottom one (reverse toned) is at least one point higher (and likely 1.5).

There are less contact marks in the fields, the cheek is cleaner, the luster is stronger (a bit of an assumption based on the photo of the other), and the color is at worst a wash (I’d argue the reverse toner is stronger color wise but it may be held back by not being on the obverse).

If I was not using color bumps, I’d call the original coin a 63+ and the bottom coin a 65.

If I do market grading/color bumps, I’d call the original a 64+ and the other a 66.

If I used the basis of the original being a 65, I’d call the other a 66+.

 

And I am a bit biased towards my coin, but I’m willing to say the coins I have are overgraded too. I posted another 65 a while back that I owned. I bought it for the color but consider it to be a 64.

I also own a 67 and a 66 Morgan where I think the 66 is closer to a 67 while the 67 is closer to a 66.

 

I think a few factors are at play here.

The first coin has obverse toning, yours has reverse. This is well acknowledged to have a difference in grading - obverse toning is rewarded more than reverse. Right or wrong? Your opinion. Fact is, the exact same coin with the exact same toning on the obverse will grade higher at a TPG than the coin with the exact same toning on the reverse. Point against your coin.

Quality of toning - your coin's toning is attractive, no denying that. However, it is darker, and lacks a desirable pattern. There are great colors there, but the toning is thicker, and less organized. The first coin has overall lighter toning, and has a great pattern. Additionally, it has very desirable colors in the blues and purples. Your coin has great colors, no denying it, but it just doesn't have the same level as the first one.

Luster - your coin wins here, but the real importance is how does that luster make the toning pop? The toning on your coin appears thick enough to have muted the luster somewhat on the reverse. Without that strong luster, the toning won't pop. This is a detriment to the eye appeal score.

Contact marks on your coin are minimal - but the reverse of the first coin is almost flawless. Sure, there are some noticeable marks on the obverse, and they aren't great. They don't help at all. But having a side that could legitimately grade 66 or 67 really helps this part of the score.

As I have said previously, there are very different reasons why each of these coins grades 65 in the opinion of the TPG. You as a collector may prioritize different aspects - you might want a coin with super clean fields, or blazing luster, or great color, to the detriment of the other aspects. But a coin can't be graded on one aspect alone - it's a balance of all the factors. In my opinion, each of these coins balances to a 65 for different reasons, but 65 is the right grade for each.

 

Great analysis and a good aid to understanding how such different coins - all of the same year and mint - can have the same grade. I am glad I had another MS 65 to throw into the mix because it helped elicit even more of your insights.

 

For comparison, or curiosity, NGC graded this 1881-S Morgan of mine MS65.

 

@physics-fan3.14 I appreciate the analysis and concede the obverse vs reverse point (even if I personally don’t agree with it).

I’ll add that my example has an equally flawless reverse (the toned side). And the color isn’t muted. It’s closer to semi-pl on the reverse and the big colors (green, bluish/purple) are there.

The original photo was more for grading the surfaces and didn’t fully highlight the color.


Please see the video (this was before the new holder):

https://www.instagram.com/p/BtOkblsgBxx/?igshid=1350esg7ymy51


And some more photos of the toned side:

 

I’m also not certain what you meant by the first coin having a nicer pattern? It doesn’t display any end-roll, crescent/arc, textile, or any unusual shapes*.



*this would be an example of an unusually cool shape in my opinion:
https://www.instagram.com/p/BY1gnxMBQe6/?igshid=59flynfu35wd

 

Don't ever crack that out with that grade as it won't grade the same or higher. Be happy with what it is.

 

I'll agree, it doesn't show the shapes you suggest. This is a point which is somewhat hard to explain. Your coin has great colors, but the lack of a pattern on your coin is more the point here. On the first coin, there is a locus - the center has the purples, then it clearly fades to the blues, then greens, then yellows. It's not the crescent arc that we are most familiar with, but there is a clear and distinct color progression across the coin.

Your coin has that great natural color progression, but the colors are more intermixed. Again, completely natural and fantastic shades of color, but it isn't the smooth transition of the first coin.

Ahh, I'm not explaining it well. It's more of an intuitive thing, but my impression is the first coin has a more pleasing transition than yours does.

 

I guess I’m just not seeing it the same way. To me the original coin’s toning is nice and star worthy, but the transition doesn’t do enough to make it that special (and overcome all the contact marks to place it at a 65).

 

Just to clarify: the coin in the original post is not mine (and I’d agree that it shouldn’t be cracked as it’s already maxed out).

The one I added as a comparison is mine.

 

With a 63 obverse, and a 66 reverse, add in color bump for the eye appeal. (*)
Just doesn't add up to a 65* IMO.

 

I like your coin so much more.

 

Even with the clean reverse there is too much contact on the obverse to call the first coin gem.
Market grading has turned into a guessing game. Throw the standards right out the window so the TPG's can raise values.

 

Looks to be a 63.

 

I was at 64 myself. Too many marks for 65 even with the color

 

I don’t care for toned Morgans, but I’d have said MS65....