The Monster Toned Coin Game Thread

I think it is a bad exposure photograph of the coin. Looking at the slab, it looks washed out. Adjusting for correct exposure, here is what the coin probably looks like. Anybody have any different feelings if this is the way the obverse really looks???

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The Monster example is one of the best (if not the best) and is now a 68+ (as far as I know).
Here is when it sold last at Legend:
https://legendauctions.hibid.com/lot/67379-48574-3010/-1-1881-s-pcgs-ms68--cac-ex-sunnywood-simpson/

I could have picked a different example, but I wanted to stress that monster toners are rare and it takes quite a bit to reach that level (too many confuse mid to high level toners for monsters).

As for the scale in general, it does have some flaws but I wanted to keep this relatively simple. In my opinion, your Battle Creek is on the high end of the 4 scale (I'd say 4.8-4.9) and could bump into the 5 range (it's the AU 58 of toners). Plus, it is just a guide and people can disagree (just like with grading).

 

The photographs are from two sources. The full slab is from GC and the zoomed in photos were from one of the better known coin photographers (I believe Todd Pollock).

I didn't plan on having videos in this thread, but it may help.
Here is my video:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B8_gnZtHCbt/

 

I stand by my 5. It is a very rich looking rainbow toned coin. The video confirms my opinion even more to me. When we are ready, I have a pair of Morgans that I used to own, and sold. One is up for resale. The other resold at an insane price.

 

You are next after toned_morgan (I'll tag you when you are up...should be tomorrow evening).

 

Yeah the original full slab picture is too washed out. A tad more contrast and increase the shadows should do the job really. As for Morgan dude's updated one, I think the whole picture is too red, so just adjust the tint on there to a more green look.

 

My thoughts are that this one just squeezes into the 4 range (low end of that range). The luster is typical for an O-minted Morgan (so not blazing like one would get with an S-mint), the mix of colors is pleasant, and the "lightning bolt" down the middle (starting on the "U" of Pluribus) adds a unique feature. The CoinTalk Score was a top half Mid level, which is reasonable. A bonus fun fact: after buying this coin, I found out it used to reside in arguably the second best Morgan collection after that of Aurora Borealis (he goes by Colorbombed on IG and Ezmoney on CU).

@toned_morgan you are up next


Summary
Rd. 1: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63*...CT -> 3.6 (Mid) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)

 

Wow that's pretty cool having a coin that used to be in that collection! I think you know exactly which one I'm going to go with...

 

And here' a video of the coin too.

 

I'll call it a 3 (Mid).
The luster is nice, the color is there but it's not quite enough to push it much higher, and the grade is a bit of a limiter (there can be high end 62s but it takes something quite special).

 

I'd give it a 2. Nice even toning but dull.

 

Mid 3, but closer to 2 than 4.

 

Mid 3 at best. Nice toning, but not spectacular. I would not pay a premium for that kind of toning. Not intense, and not rainbow. Pleasant, and fine as an addition to a collection. But not bigger than a breadbox, so to speak.

 

Nice idea for a thread @ddddd.

I would have said 3 for the first coin. The toning is very attractive but more luster would have moved it into 4 territory. I echo what @Lehigh96 said about the levels. I personally feel his coin is worthy of a 5 given the transition of colors and the overall eye appeal.

The second coin that @toned_morgan posted I would classify as a 2. The luster is nice especially in the video but to me I saw the lack of surface preservation before I saw the color. On the two coins prior I saw the color first and then began to grade and evaluate the coin.

I think when we are talking monsters the grade is such an important piece. If the grade isn’t higher than gem 65 than I don’t believe the coin can be called a monster. The elements of grading specifically surface preservation and luster are going to be the two key factors which determine monster or not. Coins with these two factors at 66 or higher are going to impact the overall eye appeal. A monster coin could essentially be a blast white Morgan graded 68 with blazing luster or even one with super deep mirrors. Hell any coin that brings moon money could be called a monster. Monsters are supposed to be scary not pretty. If I am scared to tell my wife what the coin cost than to me it’s a monster.

 

Just tag me when ready. I have a pair of aces for your consideration.

 

Those are some good points!
I do think you can have a monster 63 or 64 but it is rare (and most that would probably be monsters at 65 or higher would be one step below, at high end, as a 64 or lower).

 

Last call before we move on in around 40 minutes...

 

3 on the blue Morgan

 

Summary
Rd. 1: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63*...CT -> 3.6 (Mid) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 2: 1880 Morgan PCGS MS62...CT -> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)

 

@toned_morgan let us know what your score was for the 1880

@Morgandude11 you are up