How many Full Steps do you see?

I really only see one that I feel is a firm yes in my eyes #6, but with this being a subjective and interpretive decision to make, I say 3, 4, 5, 6, & 9. I do wish though I had a larger screen to look at these with.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I selected 0 since each example has some ding or flaw in one or more of the first 5 steps.

 

I see 5, but all are borderline...I'll wait for the reveal and then guess.

 

I also wanted to add, is this one of those "I see five lights" when there are only four? Yes, Star Trek has something to do with this comment.

 

I would like to ask the people who said "0" a serious question. Are you using PCGS standards like I asked, or are you using your own personal standards?

 

Using there own minds,looking at the steps and saying,nope,nope,yes,yes,nop,nope probably.

 

I don't mind that, but when you are submitting to a TPG, you need to be able to predict how they are going to grade the coins using their standards. Applying your own personal standard which is far more conservative only serves to cost you money.

So it would be beneficial for me to know who is using their own personal standard, and who was trying to predict what PCGS would say.

 

1 no
2 yes
3 no
4 yes
5 Questionable but lean to yes
6 no
7 yes
8 yes
9 Questionable /yes

 

3,4,5,6,7,9

 

I'll say 4.

 

I voted 0.

 

Definitely my own. I do not trust TPGs to know what they are doing. The examiners are not given sufficient time, even if they start out as numismatists.

In the end, the goal is to make sure you buy the slab and trust them, whether they are trust WORTHY or not.

Dealers just want to send in the right coins at the right time to get lead turned into gold.

I'm VERY cynical because of BASIC attribution mistakes identifying early large cents. They don't even know the difference between a reverse of 94 and a Reverse of 97 or Heads of 93, 94 and 95.

But I'm supposed to TRUST THEM. Sorry, it's not going to happen.

However, I am submitting my first coin (1796 NC-2 Large Cent) to PCGS for slabbing because the market for slabs (entombed coins) is higher than the market for raw coins. It grieves me.

 

I was going to do the reveal and then do the NGC thread, but after thinking it over, I think it would be better to do all the guesses first without seeing any of the date/mm or grades. I have linked the new thread for the NGC Jeffersons below.

How many Full Steps do you see? (Part 2)

Please click the link, and examine the photos and submit your guesses. Please note that I have changed the voting method in the second thread in an effort to make participation easier and the results easier to see.

 

Spot-on, indeed.

 

I admit I'm using my own standards. Sorry for not following what you asked since that is important to know. When it comes to what PCGS will ultimately consider FS then this exercise is very difficult. To me, what they consider minor is very subjective. In some of the examples the steps are very well struck/defined but have a gash or two across them. In others, the steps are not as well struck with lesser gashes. I'm not going to guess the number since I'd be just pulling a number out of my ..." I am interested in which of these did get FS designation. I find this even more difficult than defining FB Mercury's.

 

I think I'm beginning to see pattern, Four complete grooves means five full steps to some and four steps to others like me. I want to see both the groove above and below to consider it a full step. This mean four grooves would be complete and either the top of the bottom step or bottom of the top step could be blended rather than defined for some to see Five Step designation.

 

Lehigh, if you are a collector of FS Nickels.....how do you rate PCGS and NGC in terms of grading accuracy of those coins ?

 

That all depends on ones grading standard. Accuracy to one may not mean the same thing to another. I'd rather see designations like "Well Struck Steps", "Well Struck Monticello", ... A coin with an exceptional strike that may not get a FS designation due to a break across a step or two is more appealing to me than one weakly detailed with clean steps. Maybe they need a BS designation.

 

hey @Lehigh96 i voted 0. to me i just didn't see any 1 of the 9 that i would want to own even if it had the "FS" designation. to me 5 Full Steps should be 5 Full Steps with nothing interfering with that at all. if i were to stay with PCGS rules about Full Steps then i would say 2. good luck to ya man

 

The Reveal: ZERO

Coin #1: 1938 MS65



Coin #2: 1938-D UNC Details--Wheel Mark



Coin #3: 1944-P MS66 (Cracked out of NGC MS67 Old Fatty)



Coin #4: 1945-P MS65



Coin #5: 1947-D MS66



Coin #6: 1948-D MS66



Coin #7: 1958 MS64



Coin #8: 1963 MS65



Coin #9: 1964 MS64




All of these coins were part of my latest PCGS submission. I could understand that some would get FS while others wouldn't, but for all nine coins to strike out is absurd. Furthermore, the grades on the last 3 are absurd.

I will reveal the NGC coins from part 2 a little later today, but would like to see what discussion comes from this reveal first.