Good job, guys. This was a 67, and over half of you got it right! Average guess was 66.3, with 35 guesses. As many of you mentioned, this is a solid 67. There are very few marks, and even those are just slight ticks. The cheek is smooth and the fields are quite clean.
Yeah, but it's a '79-S. And those are supposed to be graded using tougher standards than other Morgans. And if ya did that, given what is there, it should be a 65.
Why should it be graded using tougher standards? Aren't the standards the standard and should be applied the same to all dates? If you are willing to sell me graded 65's that look like this, I'll happily pay you 66 prices all day long. Find me a 65 that looks like this and feel free to post it here.
The photos on that 1892-S, MS-64 graded dollar leave me not wanting to trust the full slab shots at all. Ms. Liberty's cheek on the full slab shot almost looks like it's been "thumbed." ("Thumbed" means running your thumb over the cheek of a coin like a Morgan Dollar. The oil in your thumb softens the effect of any marks on the piece and makes look smoother.) I suspect that the close-ups and real pictures and the slab shots are done on a scanner. A scan can cover up a lot of sins.
No they are not. And it's not just the early S mint Morgans that this is done with - there's several other coins, denominations as well that are graded based on tougher standards. And you should know this. The fact that you don't, says something. And yes, the TPGs are well aware of it and usually even follow this policy. But rather obviously, they sure didn't this time. I'm not insinuating anything - I'm saying it flat out ! But then I have been saying it flat out for many years.
Obviously, I'm fully aware that they *do* grade according to different standards. I'm asking *should* they?
It sure didn't appear to be obvious based on your previous statement. I mean if you knew it, then why did you say this ? But to answer your question, yes, they absolutely should grade certain coins of the same series, where basically entire mintage of that specific date/mint combination is known to have been struck and to be found much nicer than any other coins in the series, on tougher standards.
Starting to lose track of whether or not we are guessing the grade or offering our own? Physics, you said "Good job, guys. This was a 67, and over half of you got it right! Average guess was 66.3, with 35 guesses." Probably that beautiful 17 year getting to me, but I thought we were supposed to be grading vs. GTG? Isn't that what you suggested? I graded this beauty a 65 btw. Don't hate me because of that.
You are guessing the grade. Ideally, your grade and the TPG grade should be the same, if the TPG's are grading accurately and you are grading accurately. I've tried to select solid for the grade examples in each thread. Some GTGs are out to make a point about undergraded or overgraded examples - not these threads. These threads are out to show accurately graded coins, so we can see how we compare. Now, I understand that some people grade differently, and I understand that sometimes people disagree with what the TPG says or does. However, PCGS and NGC are the de-facto standards in the hobby. That's another debate for another day. If you consistently grade 2 points lower than them, you aren't going to do well in the graded-coin market. So, in my mind "guessing the grade on the label" and "guessing the grade you would give this coin" should be equivalent statements.