How good is CoinTalk compared to the TPGs? Let's find out! Over the next several months, I'll be posting a Guess the Grade thread each week. I will be using photos from the Heritage auction archives (please do not cheat!). All you have to do is guess the grade! I will be attaching a poll to each thread. Please select the grade that you think best represents the coin. Also feel free to post your opinions about the coin, and it would be most educational if you could explain why you chose the grade you did. In order to give everyone time to respond, I'll reveal the grade Tuesday evening Around Christmas, I will tally up the results and see how we did. This thread is an offshoot of a recent thread where I compared CT grading to the TPG, seen here: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/how-good-is-cointalk-at-grading.343417/ On to the coin! This week, we have a 1937D Washington quarter. Start us off with something easy?
I'll post my opinions about the coin after the poll closes so that I don't influence others' grading one way or another. Looking forward to seeing how this experiment plays out.
It seems generally very mark-free, but the muted luster and the hit in the prime focal area keep it down from superb gem territory. I guess PCGS called it a 66. My personal grade would be MS-65
I'm a bit surprised by that. I say that because there are more than few experienced graders who would say that Washington quarters are among the toughest, if not the toughest, coins to grade. But, opinions do vary of course.
I know the concept of influence was mentioned in the other thread, and I do agree it happens, there's simply no way of getting around that. But one thing I have always found interesting was in making note of who and how often the influence factor seems apparent. Sometimes it's quite surprising, to me anyway, as to where that influence lies. It's also not all that uncommon for that influence to have the opposite effect of what one might think it would have. In other words, the influence factor can go either direction. As for me, well, I don't think it's any secret that I rarely comment with my opinion in GTG threads anymore. In fact I rarely do unless specifically asked to do so. And largely for the same reason you are John. But there's another reason as well. It's because I have been watching the way it goes, and changes, for a good number of years now. As am I. But I kinda think I already have a pretty good idea.
I voted in the poll as to what I feel the TPG gave the coin. Is it possible to tell us the what style slab it is in? I will reserve my opinion of the coin after the results are in.
Down a grade, 63 for me. Not sure when PCGS graded it, so I'm hoping it was back aways. The shaving nick on his cheek keeps it from going higher. Steve
Wow, this coin has one hit on the front + tiny chatter on cheek and at bottom of the bust, with a smaller one on the back and very smooth, creamy surfaces. I went a little high at MS66 before I saw the cheek better. So I'd guess in the 65, 65+ range.
64 Nice fields, luster looks good presumably even with the HA photos, strike is decent but not great. Knock on the cheek limits to 64.
I said MS65. Although the cheek hit is a distraction, I think the coin is relatively clean so that someone felt it should be a 65.
MS 64 I think the cheek hit is enough to keep it out of a 65 and the overall eye appeal is hurt by the dark toning (spots?) around the letters (this may signal originality but to me it's not an overall positive).
If you want to reduce the ‘influence factor’, I would suggest that respondents give their assessment of the coin, but withhold their assigned grade within their comment, until after the actual grade has been posted.