I am completely stumped on this MS-67+ Washington Quarter

I can be most impudent at times.......

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

When you're grading the coin "in hand", are you allowed to put your thumb over the biggest hit?

 

Let me see it in hand first.

 

Yes. I've taken about 300 photographs of Washington's in the last few weeks. Thousands since I began this series. You get to understand photos compared to in-hand to a certain degree but I understand what you're saying.

 

TypeCoin971793, asked: "What is your opinion on market grading. Such at an AU Bust Dollar (with obvious wear) getting an MS grade. IMO, the practice is wrong."

IMHO, "Market Grading" SUCKS! It was invented by big dealers, is extremely hard to teach as value is included, and how do you explain that this AU is different than a different AU they call Uncirculated?

green18, posted: "And all of this ascertained from photog and not 'in hand'....."

Yes, apparently Heritage wants to make sure the bidder sees what he is going to get up the ...

 

What bothers me is that a premium AU-58 is given an MS-63 by a TPG because that is what they think it is worth. Then a dealer tries to market it as a premium MS-63 and an unsuspecting buyer gets sharfted. If the TPG actually graded the coin, that would not be a problem, and the market will naturally pay a premium price for the premium coins for the grade.

 

"TypeCoin971793, posted: "What bothers me is that a premium AU-58 is given an MS-63 by a TPG because that is what they think it is worth. Then a dealer tries to market it as a premium MS-63 and an unsuspecting buyer gets sharfted. If the TPG actually graded the coin, that would not be a problem, and the market will naturally pay a premium price for the premium coins for the grade."

Good thinking young man, your idea is at least forty years old. That's what technical grading was all about. Technical grading was not subjective. It was real. Lot's of us old dinosaurs have constantly expressed what you apparently just thought of to no avail. Grading would be simple for everyone.

Grade the coin based only on its condition of preservation and let the "market" price them.

Then the famous rare coins that were once auctioned off as XF/AU for $5000 could still be graded XF/AU (rather than the MS-64 grade of today) and sell for two million dollars. It ain't going tp happen. Dealers want grading to be subjective and complicated.

 

Would you pay $1000+ for it? That's what NGC says its market is for an MS67+. That should be the real question. Talk is cheap. Put that money on it, that hand of yours is shaking, ain't it?

 

I ain't paying $1000 for any modern, regardless of whether it is graded VF or MS-70 Pop (1/0).

 

But what if it had a pretty green sticker on it, too? I'm tempting you, now, ain't I?

 

Don't forget that they can always claim "mechanical error" when caught in their "stuff". Also, some of these mechanical errors have somehow been beaned. Honestly I've seen them (the TPGs) go high or low.
I don't beat my chest, but there are some darkside series that I would gladly put my expertise up against the best at N or P, and they make some unacceptable judgements on coins I have seen both in attribution but more to this coin, in grading. I have seen both be off in GB "off year" matte proofs by 3 points and occasionally up to 5.
I recently tried to photo a Washie in slab and it looked miserable, couldn't get the luster & some apparent chatter marks - smaller than those on this coin - are not there even under magnification.

We always get the "must see in hand", an escape I also use too much but these photos appear to show some charms on both the obverse and reverse that appear larger than artifact and warrant a significantly lower grade despite any possibility of wonderful luster.
BTW, nobody mentioned the soft strike and also reverse issues at rim towards 10 o'clock.

 

The thing is, you're on the other end of the extreme that you dislike. There are definitely people who only care what number is on the piece of plastic, but don't let those people discount the positives TPGs bring to the hobby.

I can speak first hand being a little less than a year in that I would have quit after my first month after getting burned with every raw coin I tried to buy. Having TPGs, as imperfect as they are, allowed me to not get frustrated and quit. I'm sure I'm not alone.

The nice thing is you can still buy a slabbed coin and just focus on the coin itself. The "buy the slab not the coin" mantra gets tossed around ad nauseam because nothing could be more true.

You and the dealers you talk with can loathe TPGs, I understand they're not for everyone. But understand their importance because they have their role and it's a big one whether you like it or not.

 

Jeeze I should send this back in. If they call that one 67+ they should easily upgrade this one to 68 lol

 

Lehigh is too invested in this plastic to back out, now, Doug. He has no choice but to keep on playing poker.

 

Why would I talk about what the TPGs did in the 1980's? Based on the holder, the coin was graded very recently and I was talking about the current practices of the TPG's and you know it. Furthermore, you know I have been collecting coins for for more than 10 years; your condemnation was nothing more than an attempted cheap shot.

If you go back to my very first post in this thread, I admitted that I think the coin is overgraded even factoring in the eye appeal & luster that can't be evaluated from the photos. AND aren't you the guy who has consistently & repeatedly stated on this forum that it is impossible to grade a coin from photographs. Yet here we have a coin graded MS67+ by NGC and verified as an MS67 by CAC, but because Doug and his cronies on Cointalk saw some photos, the coin is overgraded by 3 points. Your hubris never ceases to amaze me.

I have no problem criticizing the TPGs and there have been many times when I have said publicly that they are wrong. But I have a problem declaring them wrong when I have never actually seen the damn coin!!!! And so should you!

 

The most relevant point here is not what the current TPG standard for this coin in this grade is; it's what other coins in this grade from the same TPG's look like. If the coin pictured below can be adjudicated MS67+ - it's from PCGS CoinFacts - how could the OP coin possibly even be close?




Not even the best of upland bird shooters could lead a target moving this fast and this far.

 

The problem is that you and others are substituting your standards for NGC's standards. I have no problem with your standards and actually find them preferable to NGC's. With respect to most coins, both your standards and NGC's will align and you will find very little difference in the way you grade the coins. It is only an outlier like this one that the divergence can be seen.

As we have already established, the photos are magnifying the hits on the coin. The slab photo is a much better representation of the appearance of the coin IMO.



The core problem that almost everyone has with this coin is the number of minor hits and the fact that the seemingly biggest of the minor marks is in the focal area of reverse, the eagle's breast. Your contention is that the mark is large enough to qualify as a major hit in the focal area and preclude a gem grade. I don't blame your for that analysis, I just disagree. Based on the slab photos, I can barely see that mark and consider it minor enough that a gem grade is still in play. Without a loupe, the coin appears to have premium gem surfaces, mostly because of the clean fields. When viewed under a loupe, the myriad of minor ticks (mostly on the reverse) would become evident and I think that most people would not consider a premium gem grade for surface preservation. Personally, I give the surfaces of this coin an MS65 grade.

But this is where your standards and NGC's diverge. While you are unwilling to market grade the coin above MS65 for superlatives in the other aspects of grading, NGC is perfectly willing to do just that. As a collector of Washington Quarters, you must know from experience that most toned coins are deep, dark, and often have muted luster. This is one of the very few Washington's that I have seen with bright pastel hues. Combine that with an excellent strike and what would have to be incredible luster based on the assigned grade, and they decided that the overall appearance of the coin was that of top tier premium gem and that the problems associated with the surface preservation were less important than the holistic view of the coin.

As I said, I prefer your grading method because it is more consistent and less prone to the controversy that is abound in this thread. People often confuse my attempts to explain the actions of the TPG's with agreement (eg Doug). My initial assessment of this coin was that it was a low end MS67. However that assessment was me attempting to utilize NGC's grading standards. If I were to employ my own grading standards, like the other members of in this thread are doing, I would say that this coin has no business being in an MS67 holder.

 

You know perfectly well that neither service limits the grade of a coin based on one element of grading. A coin with MS64 surfaces and MS67 strike, luster, and eye appeal is NEVER going to reside in an MS64 holder.

Didn't I make a thread years ago about the TPG's basically ignoring strike as an element of grade?