The Official CoinTalk Grading Experiment 5

I guess that so many "arguably" overgraded coins are featured on this forum that it gets overlooked that those coins are only a fraction of those that are actually graded accurately.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Because when I looked at the close-up photo of the 1885-S, I did not care for that coin as an MS-65, 66 or 67. Why are you so angry at that? Is it your coin? Are you trying to sell it?

 

Come on Bill, that’s a low blow, you know I don’t own the coin. I think you should go back and re-read that thread. You were the one who first started slinging mud using words like “foolish” or “kool aid drinkers”. @C-B-D even called you out for doing so. You can’t make comments like that and expect those who agreed with the assigned grade not to push back.

And I’m not pissed at you, we had a civil discussion all the way through that thread.

My jab at you in this thread is that you didn’t apply the same punitive grading standards towards this coin that you did towards the 85-S.

But if you are telling me that you’ve looked at the photos of both coins and you truly believe both coins should grade MS63+, then I will drop it.

 

I am at MS 62, but the TPG is at 63. For the record I select MS 63 in poll.

 

Ms-64. Wild guess.

 

Antiquated. Are you saying a buck isn't worth a buck anymore ?

 

MS 64. Lately it seems I'm seeing Morgans that look worse than this get graded 64, 65.

 

62

 

Alright, here's the big reveal! PCGS gave it an MS-63, and CAC agreed.

We had 48 guesses for an average of 62.4, much closer than the previous ones. Of note, 44% of you picked the right grade. Good job!

 

I’m consistently one point low

 

His call was 63+ mine was 64 and in no way did I think that coin deserved any better cause of that big mark in a prime focal area I didn’t think his grade on the 85-s out of line at all

 

I really don't see how anyone can honestly say that these two coins are even in the same league. One is clearly, vastly superior to the other! Look closely at them side by side.

There are a couple of luster breaks on the 66, but look at how extensively the marks cover her face on the 63. Look at all of the fine tickmarks in the fields on the 63. Look how smooth those fields are on the 66. I can see an honest argument for a strong 65+ on the 85S, but anyone who says that these are both the same grade needs to take a really close look at some accurately graded coins. Sorry, johnmilton, I've known you and have respected you for a long time, but can you honestly say that these two coins deserve the same grade?

 

I tried to make the same point Jason, but I think my dogmatic posting style got in the way of my substance.

 

As I posted before, my problem is with the close-up photo. My opinion is based on that photo. I don't have a lot of faith in "full slab pictures." They can be better for evaluating toning.

Here it is again. Do you see an MS-65 or higher grade coin in that picture? If you do, that you and I shall agree to disagree.

 

Jason, the 1880-O looks like a 62 to me from the slab picture, although CAC seems to agree with the grade. None of my 63s look that bad.

 

Excellent post! While I don't agree with the 66, it is quite obvious from this picture comparison that the two coins are not equal.

 

I see two morgans one a 62 and the other a 64 maybe a 65 in hand not judging from an image. I believe the 80 got a bump for the over date,and the 85 for the tad bit of color. As far as PCGS & CAC goes both could use a course in grading as here lately some of the grades and agreements to said grades....are wishful thinking!

 

Big difference in the way that 85-S looks in the holder vs. that blown up version. Side by side in the photos the 85-S looks better, but magnified, its not as appealing. Nice luster on the 80/79.

 

I voted 62, but I'm really at 62+ on this one. 62/64, but the obverse isn't quite enough to carry it up to 63 for me.

 

Nothing gets a bump for an over date. That's not, like, a component of eye appeal or something. Splitting hairs but that bugged me.