Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Insider, post: 3030477, member: 24314&quot;]<span style="color: #0000ff">Here goes.&nbsp; If the images do not show in this post, see them above.&nbsp; Not one of the coins below is original EXCEPT the Albany. That matched my show opinion and my personal opinion also: </span></p><p><br /></p><p>He went through the coins I brought, and made his guesses and suggestions.</p><p>They were (essentially):</p><ol> <li>1893 Isabella 25¢ (#1) - Cleaned, don&#039;t bother getting it graded</li> <li>1893 Isabella 25¢ (#2) - Cleaned, don&#039;t bother getting it graded, but it&#039;s a nice coin, too bad it was cleaned</li> <li>1921 Alabama 2x2 50¢ Silver Commem - Should go XF, and if I paid VF money, I did well</li> <li>1936 Albany 50¢ Silver Commem - nicest of the lot. Definitely a 64 with a chance at a 65</li> <li>1883 Liberty 5¢ Cleaned, don&#039;t bother getting it graded</li> </ol><p><span style="color: #0000ff">The grades I assigned using my interpretation of the ICG grading standards, and prevailing commercial standards follow in</span> <span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)">red</span>:</p><p><br /></p><p>Beefer518, posted: </p><p><br /></p><p>The coins that were submitted, with my guesses and comments:</p><ol> <li>1893 Isabella 25¢ (#1) (IMO, improperly cleaned, but AU)</li> <li>1893 Isabella 25¢ (#2) (IMO, improperly cleaned, AU/MS slider)</li> <li>1921 Alabama 2x2 50¢ Silver Commem (Bought as VF, but thought it could go XF)</li> <li>1936 Albany 50¢ Silver Commem (Solid 65)</li> <li>1883 Liberty 5¢ (stumped... See my comments on the GTG of this coin <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/gtg-1883-liberty-nickel-no-cents.313101/#post-3027991" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/gtg-1883-liberty-nickel-no-cents.313101/#post-3027991">here</a>)</li> </ol><p><br /></p><p>Fast forward to 4 days ago (Thursday), I get an email letting me know the coins are on their way back to me with the results. I was floored. How was I (and their rep) so far off? In hand I&#039;m pretty good at telling a cleaned coin from a coin with original surfaces, I thought.</p><p><br /></p><p>The Results:</p><ol> <li>1893 Isabella 25¢ (#1) - AU53</li> <li>1893 Isabella 25¢ (#2) - AU58 DTLS Scratched</li> <li>1921 Alabama 2x2 50¢ Silver Commem - AU53</li> <li>1936 Albany 50¢ Silver Commem - MS66</li> <li>1883 Liberty 5¢ - MS61</li> </ol><p>Coin #1, I could&#039;ve sworn was hairlined and cleaned.&nbsp;&nbsp; <span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)"><b>It is</b>. I graded this coin in the office as an AU-58, cleaned w/environmental damage.&nbsp; I appears the finalizer </span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)">&quot;Net&quot; graded your coin down to low AU.</span>&nbsp; <span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)">This practice is abhorrent to me as it teaches nothing. Your coin is a slider.&nbsp; IMO, most would sell it as an MS-60 &quot;slider&quot; due to continuous hairlines (from cleaning) throughout.&nbsp; </span></p><p><br /></p><p>Coin #2 I was expecting Details, but &#039;Scratched&#039;? What scratch? I know it was cleaned, which left hairlines, but I had to go look at my pre-submission images to look for this &#039;scratch&#039;. I see scratches (note the multiple), but no single scratch that stands out more then the others, or more then the scratches on coin #1. But, Um.... ok</p><p><br /></p><p><span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)">I graded this coin AU-58, TOOLED (fields), scratches and Altered Surface to cover it all up! Tip the coin in the light and there are furrows in the field.</span></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)">Coins #3,and #4 These grades are fair to the buyer, seller, and coin:&nbsp; In the office, I graded the Alabama (which is not original) as an AU-53 and the Albany I graded 66 due to nice eye appeal.&nbsp; My personal grade is MS-65 as I&#039;m an old timey grader.&nbsp; </span></p><p><br /></p><p>Coin #5, I&#039;m still confused on. I have another 1883 No Cents that looks almost identical to it, as far as the &#039;style&#039; of scratches, and I&#039;m currently having a conversation with another owner of an 1883 No Cents whose coin is similar to mine, so who knows, maybe it wasn&#039;t cleaned. I&#039;m not a nickel guy, so I&#039;ll hide behind that cloak!<img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie18" alt=":bag:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)">The coin has no wear.&nbsp; The image shows it has been buffed.&nbsp; I graded the coin MS-62, Not original.&nbsp; The finalizer graded it more correctly as an MS-61.</span></p><p><br /></p><p>So what am I trying to get out with this thread? Not really sure. I do feel that each and every one of the 5 coins I submitted were over by at least one grade. I also feel I definitely got away with at least one coin getting a straight grade that should have gotten a details grade.</p><p><br /></p><p><span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)">This test illustrates what I posted previously.&nbsp; You and I have PERSONAL GRADES much stricter than a typical TPGS (ICG) that must grade commercially to reflect value.&nbsp; The only grade I don&#039;t like is the &quot;straight grade&quot; given to coin #1.</span></p><p><br /></p><p>Here are the coins:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]754212[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]754213[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]754214[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]754215[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]754216[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p><span style="color: rgb(179, 0, 0)">I&#039;ll try to answer any questions on my comments.&nbsp; BTW, I have heard that there may be a similar test going on where a group of unidentified coins is being sent to all four major services.&nbsp; I HOPE IT IS TRUE!&nbsp; This was done decades ago by Coin World.</span>[/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