Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Tom B, post: 1870345, member: 11854&quot;]You are correct.&nbsp; I see the leg as wear because it is more than just a slight bit of flatness.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; 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.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here are a few points that I think are important from this thread-</p><p><br /></p><p>1) The MS 61 grade on modern coinage (SLQs are modern) is sort of a no-man&#039;s land and if a coin is graded MS61 then it should have some obvious issue.&nbsp; Without any obvious issue then it very well might be an AU in disguise.</p><p><br /></p><p>2) The &quot;old&quot; ANACS with the sterling reputation was largely earned prior to its sale to Amos Press around 1990.&nbsp; This coin was certified after this golden age and that can be determined by the obverse barcode.&nbsp; Even as far back as the late 1990s we were talking about the &quot;old&quot; ANACS slabs with fondness when compared to the newer slabs.</p><p><br /></p><p>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.</p><p><br /></p><p>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.</p><p><br /></p><p>5) You don&#039;t need to agree with the TPG assigned grade.</p><p><br /></p><p>6) You don&#039;t need to agree with how I grade.[/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