The Official CoinTalk Grading Experiment 12

Nobody in their right mind should select AU for this coin. And if there's a Details problem, please explain what you're seeing?

I stated at the beginning of this that I'm intentionally choosing only straight graded, problem free coins to make the scoring easier for me. I'm also avoiding any proof, cameo, prooflike, strike designated, or color designated coins. A true grading test would have these as outliers and "perfect-score eliminators", but I'm trying to get a simple, quantifiable measure of CT's skill compared to a TPG.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Don't you mean...or I would prefer...
CT's skill grading a "coin pic", compared to a TPGS coin "in hand" grade.
Yep, I like that better.

 

I'm in the MS-64 camp. Nice coin w/beaming luster, but a few too many marks on the obverse to warrant anything higher. Based on the images provided and IF I were a buyer of that date and pursuing coins in the mid-MS range, I would pass if it were in an MS-65 holder (bean or no bean), unless the seller was offering it at a '64 price. ;-)

 

Okay, let me explain. I don’t see any wear. However many of us have difficulties differentiating between wear and weak strike. E.g. the stars on the obv (top left) are weakly struck what *could* be interpreted as wear by collectors unexperienced with this series.

No problems. My statement was entirely unrelated to this coin. Sometimes there are minor or not so obvious issues. Just to give an example: if a coin doesn’t have enough luster for its grade, this could be a problem or a reason for a downgrade. Some of us may notice less obvious problems, others may not.

 

That is MS-65 luster. The marks are consistent with 65. I voted 65

 

Alright, time for the reveal!

With 29 guesses, the CT average was 64.48. PCGS and CAC called this a 64, so you guys nailed it. After comparing quite a few 64's on Heritage, I think this one is definitely a premium 64 (if resubmitted, I have no doubt it would be 64+ at least). It probably has a shot at 65.

As many of you identified, the luster on this coin is above average. Contact marks, especially obverse, are the limiting factor here. While many 64s have quite a few light marks, this coin has a couple that I would consider significant (especially at the bottom of the obverse). Also, as a few of you explained, gold is treated slightly differently than silver (more marks are allowed) because the metal is softer. A 64 gold coin is generally going to have more marks than a similarly sized 64 silver coin.

 

That seems like a fair grade. I went and looked at some other examples that sold on Heritage of the same date and this one seems on par with the 64 grade (interetingly enough even one of the 65s looked worse).

 

You just beat me to it. I said 64. I thought the luster gave it that but too many marks for higher. I wish you’d let them run longer like you were at first as I sometimes don’t check in for a couple days

 

The perils of playing this game on a phone. I missed the marks at 7:00 on the obverse.

 

While that is considered an "out-of-prime" area, I think those marks are fairly severe and contributed quite a bit to the grade.

 

thanks for another good grading/learning experience.