Suuuure you did! Just joking, of course. FWIW, I did that very same thing more than a few times -- until I realized my first hunch was usually better than my second (although maybe not in this case).
p.s. whenever I see a coin like this -- one that appears undergraded (a good friend calls them "head scratchers") -- I think to myself, "Self, what are you missing?". To wit, I wonder if there's something we're not seeing in the photo -- perhaps a few hairlines, or perhaps muted luster like Lehigh suggests (although I must admit I don't see what he's seeing from the photos, his argument does make sense as muted luster could cause the coin to grade lower than). I'd really like Bud to comment on this....
I don't see why you all seem to ignore the hits, scratches and nicks on this coin. It is a nice coin and has great details but grading standards can't put it higher than MS-64. Here's a coin with a weaker strike - less detail - but with less wear and handling marks, and it grades MS-66.
p.s. what nicks and hits? I see a lot of jpeg compression, and possibly a small hit on each arm -- and nothing to preclude a gem grade.
The luster is muted due to the tone on the Obverse - here is a picture were instead of highlighting the tone I will try to highlight the luster (man its tough to with this kind of tone)- the Reverse have nice luster but it is not as impeaded by the tone - Still I think the coin is a MS65 - Oh yea, the spot on the upper right side is my big dumb finger print - its not on the coin.
Well, I dont think the coin you have shown is better or should be a MS66 either - Usually I dont try to rip coins but here it goes because I TOTALLY disagree with your statements of weaker strike & less handling marks- While the coin I have does have some nicks they are no where near as distracting than as on the MS66 that you posted - please see the "artwork" I have done on the other coin.