Jerome, Please remember that grading is subjective, and everybody is entitled to their own opinion. That said, what's your opinion of the grade? Take care...Mike
I'd grade it VF30, there's just too much wear - half the lines in the reverse shield are worn smooth. However, I figure that NGC graded it XF45. That's because the key grading points are all there on both obv & rev for the XF45 grade. But when the coin as a whole is taken into consideration - it just doesn't measure up.
I will leave my comments relative to the grade for a later time, but I will say that I believe you are mistaking a weak strike for wear as far as the shield on the reverse is concerned. Take care...Mike p.s. here's a huge photo of the reverse that may be helpful: http://www.pbase.com/miker/image/77493052/original.jpg
Not gonna say it's impossible, but it seems unlikely to me in this case. Yes the high point of the reverse is just above the shield. But look at the lower half of the reverse, the talons are one of the key grading areas and they are quite well struck and retain good detail. And look at the feathers of the arrow - almost smooth. A similar thing with the lower feathers of the eagle. On the right they are well struck and have good detail, while on the left they do not - again almost smooth. Normally with a coin of weak strike it is the high points that do not get metal fill, that I could understand. But when a higher point fills the adjacent lower points must also be filled and have similar detail. When the lower points do not, I can only attribute it to unusual wear - not a weak strike. And the color in all of these areas is enough different to make me think wear - not weak strike. (at least based on the pics) We don't disagree often Mike, but on this one we do pal.
Fair enough. I'll even give you a chance to win me over -- simply show me another example of a coin that shows this wear pattern. That said, might I win you over if I showed you several MS examples with weakness in this area that could not be caused by wear? As stated above I suggest it's a weak strike due to the high point on the other side being the legs of seated Liberty (in the case of the shield weakness), and weakness in this area is not uncommon. That's not to say there's not wear on this area, but the flatness you describe is mostly due to the weak strike centrally on the reverse, which is virtually identical to the third photo above...Mike
I think NGC gave it an XF45 and I give it an XF40. It shows a bit too much wear for AU in my opinion. I see wear on all of the high points, but especially on the right arm and leg of Liberty and towards the center of the eagle, though it does look a bit weakly struck there as well.
Good examples that help make your case Mike, that makes this a tough one. Especially since I have a couple that help make mine. We may have to call this one a toss up. The first is slabbed by NGC as XF45 - second by ANACS as XF40 XF45 XF40
not enough info to hazard a guess went to a show today - very surprised at what i saw - many over graded coins in PCGS slabs. -Steve
LOL !! - never even thought about it. I only browsed thru the first page when looking for examples, figured 2 was enough so I quit. That'll teach me to pay closer attention I still think they overgraded it Mike
I won't disagree with that. For those of you who haven't figured it out yet, NGC graded the coin XF 45. I'm with GDJMSP that the coin is a bit overgraded, and would grade it closer to 40 or even 35. That said, I have no problem whatsoever paying a little extra for coins with this natural of an appearance (the coin in-hand looks similar to the Heritage photo posted above), as the majority of the coins of this type are not attractive, so the overgraded holder didn't bother me in the least. Regardless, the coin is now raw and lives in my Dansco type set, and I hope you all enjoyed this installation of "hone your grading skills". Now if I can only find a few seated dollars and a trade dollar that look like this..... Take care...Mike
I'm going to say it is a VF - by British Commonwealth grading standards that is! Using numbers is just far too complicated for us. Mike,that is a very nice Quarter you've shown us. Aidan.