Guess the Grade: Standing Liberty Quarter Type 1

3 Benjamin's

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Ouch! That D costs extra.

 

My experience tells me that an MS61 should have some pretty serious issues with respect to hits, nicks, luster or other marks. Your coin does not show obvious hits, nicks or marks that would lead me to MS61. The luster may be dead and this may contribute to the MS61 grade.

However, my experience also leads me to believe that many MS61 (or thereabouts) coins are really AU with generally good eye appeal. Your coin is certified MS61, but it looks AU. Obviously, I have not seen it in-hand and the point could well be made that ANACS should be given the benefit of the doubt, but you can also realize that this coin might come back as AU more often than not if sent in for regrade.

Overall, I still think it is AU.

 

Not as much as the S though.

 

MS 61 seems a bit harsh for that coin. But I submit this quote from the ANA Grading Standards for US Coins guidebook for consideration.

MS-60 SLQ: "A strictly uncirculated coin with no trace of wear, but with blemishes more obvious than for MS63. May lack full mint luster and surfaces may be dull, spotted or heavily toned. Head details* may be incomplete."

 

I was gonna say it seems like you were in agreement with this grade for the most part.

If you see that leg as wear, then that's probably what ANACS seen and just gave it the benefit of the doubt and let it slide into a Mint State holder for overall eye appeal. Problem is I have seen other 61s, 62s, and 63s that don't look as good as the one I have. Also seen 58s that weren't far off and were comparable at times.

 

Worth a look... http://www.cointalk.com/threads/are-all-anacs-slabs-worthless.208687/

 

You are correct. I see the leg as wear because it is more than just a slight bit of flatness. However, I imagine that ANACS decided the coin could go MS if it is largely devoid of hairlines in the fields or luster voids in the fields. Both of these characteristics are common on AU coins and the lack of them might bump the coin to MS as far as they were concerned.

Here are a few points that I think are important from this thread-

1) The MS 61 grade on modern coinage (SLQs are modern) is sort of a no-man's land and if a coin is graded MS61 then it should have some obvious issue. Without any obvious issue then it very well might be an AU in disguise.

2) The "old" ANACS with the sterling reputation was largely earned prior to its sale to Amos Press around 1990. This coin was certified after this golden age and that can be determined by the obverse barcode. Even as far back as the late 1990s we were talking about the "old" ANACS slabs with fondness when compared to the newer slabs.

3) An incompletely stuck or flat head on an SLQ will not generate an MS61 grade on its own, and such incompletely struck coins can grade very high.

4) The lighting used for images can make a coin look better or worse than it does in-hand and the lighting used on this coin might have been too harsh for the issue on the leg and may have exaggerated it.

5) You don't need to agree with the TPG assigned grade.

6) You don't need to agree with how I grade.

 

7) Everyone was wrong guessing.

 

Good eye! But that was the point. I will look this coin over when I get it back and come back to this thread.

 

Get it back? What did I miss and where is it now? Are you crossing it over?

 

Beautiful summary Tom.

I enjoy the coin quite well and thought it could have been under graded. Even if the grade is wrong I love the coin and that's all that matters.

I am 'fond' of these white slabs and generally like to collect them. I may crack this out one day for a better grade if I decide to sell but until then it's staying as is. These slabs are just the most visually appealing to me for some odd reason.

What really needs to happen is CAC needs to add ONLY the white slabs from ANACS to their list of accepted coins to CAC and draw some of these old slabs out of hiding and see what else is out there.

 

GBroke has been photographing a few coins for me. Had to send them to him for imaging.

 

Nice. He seems to know where to tickle the camera.

 

Before I read any of the posts I voted 58. I also thought that it had significant wear not only on the leg but also on the eagle's breast and top edge of the wing. I was debating between 55 and 58 and chose 58 because of eye appeal. Also, I didn't know it was ANACS; if it was PCGS or NGC maybe I would have been right on the money?

 

I too looked at that breast and the leading edge of the wing and thought it was wear, but without the coin in hand, I wondered if it wasn't toning...which is why I don't buy a lot of coins over the internet, there just isn't a substitute for getting the coin in hand and examining it.