To star or not to star - official game thread

I probably would consider a star for the 1886 because of the exceptional eye appeal. Not so much for the 1884-O. I think the reverse of the 1884-O is exceptional and probably why the star was given. If the obverse of the 1886 could be mated to the reverse of the 1884-O the result would be a monster coin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Star on the 86 and no star on the 84.

 

Thanks for reviving this thread.

I think neither deserve a star. First one is too dark or near terminal. The first also doesn’t look like a 65 to me.

The second one doesn’t have much eye appeal to me but I know green is a desirable color for toning so maybe it is very eye appealing in hand. I don’t think the second one is 65 so maybe it has 66 luster which combined with the green toning warranted the star.

 

I actually just had a discussion with Mark Salzberg yesterday about the star and his philosophy of it. He pretty much straight told me he wouldn't give a star for reverse toning. It had to be on the obverse and it had to really grab you. Based on my discussion with him, neither deserve a star. In my opinion, the second one is actually rather unattractive.

 

Not a fan of either coin. No and no.

 

I assume this same principle applies? I would like to share my coins but they are either PL (U.S.) or a mixture of world coins. Not to mention I would love to see what @physics-fan3.14 has stashed away.

1886: No star. I have seen some exceptionally toned silver dollars and this one falls short IMHO.

1884-O: No star. Unless this coin just really pops in hand I’m a bit puzzled as to why they felt it deserved the designation. I find the dark toning to be very unattractive.[/user]

 

@Coinsandmedals world coins are perfectly fine on this thread (some has been posted before). The pl/cameo stars are harder to judge, but we can give it a try in the revived version of this thread.

 

I agree with the idea that the color has to grab you in order to earn a star.
However, the obverse only part I believe is flawed. Why should only one side be favored? There are exceptional reverse toners and there are plenty of coins where the reverse design is better than the obverse (even when there is no color). Plus, with something like foreign coins, the TPGs themselves can be indecisive about which side is even the obverse.

 

I’m at no star for either. The first is a 64 in my opinion and a dark reverse toner that really doesn’t appeal to me. The second is dark not particularly appealing and agin I feel overgraded as it’s too baggy for a 65 especially the cheek. Notice no cac bean on either and they usually sticker solid graded toned Morgan dollars

 

Well, I don't like it and I don't agree with it either. But it's straight from the horse's mouth, so that is how it is.

 

This is what I get for skipping around in the thread and not reading the whole thing. I have a few world coins I will post in the next few rounds. I happily yield to the majority opinion on the PL/cameo stars.

 

No on both Morgans. Don't know if the 1960 Proof Cent is a true cameo. Maybe it's just shadows but frost looks missing on folds of the jacket. Yes if it's true Cameo. No if it's not.

 

Fair enough.
It is interesting that his opinion isn't followed in the grading room. In fact, we continue to see some really questionable stars (like the coins with a small crescent or those that you just look at and wonder what did they see...).

 

Summary:
Rd. 1: 1955-S MS 64 1c (NO Star) --> Should it star? -->Yes: 2 vs No: 11

Rd. 2: 1885-O MS 65 $1 (NO Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 4 vs No: 3

Rd. 3: 1813 50c (NO Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 2 vs No: 9

Rd. 4: 1835 50c (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 1 vs No: 4

Rd. 5: 1821 50c (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 2 vs No: 4

Rd. 6: 1947-D 5c (NO Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 6 vs No: 2

Rd. 7: 1882-S $1 MS 63 (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 0 vs No: 8

Rd. 8: 1882-S $1 MS 67 (NO Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 2 vs No: 8

Rd. 9: Darth Morgan (NO Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 1 vs No: 5

Rd. 10: 1820 Cent (NO Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 2 vs No: 5

Rd. 11: Swiss Silver (NO Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 1 vs No: 4

Rd. 12: 1940 50c (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 4 vs No: 3

Rd. 13: Israel Lira (NO Star*^) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 4 vs No: 0

Rd. 14: 1937-D 5c (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:2 vs No: 0

Rd. 15: 1885 Morgan (No Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:0 vs No: 12

Rd. 16: 1958-D Franklin (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:0 vs No: 7

Rd. 17: 1958-D Franklin #2 (No Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:1 vs No: 6

Rd. 18: 1958-D Franklin #3 (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:5 vs No: 2

Rd. 19: 1881-S Morgan (No Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:4 vs No: 3

Rd. 20: 1884-O Morgan (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:5 vs No: 2

Rd. 21: 1874 PF Trade Dollar (No Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:1 vs No: 6

Rd. 22: 1964 Kennedy (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:1 vs No: 7

Rd. 23: 1958-D Franklin (No Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:6 vs No: 3

Rd. 24: San Diego Commem (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes:1 vs No: 5

Rd. 25: 1886 $1 (Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 7 vs No: 0

Rd. 26: 1887 $1 (No Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 0 vs No: 7

Rd. 27: 1880-S $1 (Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 4 vs No: 3

Rd. 28: 1963 PF 5c (No Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 5 vs No: 0

Rd. 29: 1968 PF 50c (No Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 1 vs No: 5

Rd. 30: 1880-S $1 (Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 0 vs No: 6

Rd. 31: 1880-S $1 (Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 2 vs No: 3

Rd. 32: 1886 $1 (No Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 2 vs No: 5

Rd. 33: 1882-S $1 (Star)—> Should it star? —> Yes: 4 vs No: 6

Rd. 34: 1887 $1 (Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 1 vs No: 6

Rd. 35: 1900 India Rupee (No Star) —> Should it star? —> Yes: 5 vs No: 3

Rd. 36: 1880-S $1 (Star)—> Should it star? —> Yes: 8 vs No: 0

Rd. 37: 1918 Lincoln 50c (Star)—> Should it star? —> Yes: 1 vs No: 8

Rd. 38: 1886 Morgan MS 65 (No Star)—> Should it star? —> Yes: 2 vs No: 7

Rd. 39: 1884-O Morgan MS 65 (Star)—> Should it star? —> Yes: 1 vs No: 8

Totals:
No Star currently on holder, but deserves it: 7
No Star currently on holder and doesn't deserve it: 13
Star currently on holder and deserves it: 7
Star currently on holder, but doesn't deserve it: 12
------
Non-toned/PL category:
~ 1871 5c (Star) —>Should it star? —> Yes: 5 vs No: 1
------
*^ = signifies a coin that was most likely graded before the star designation was used for its respective series

 

I'm glad we can get this thread going again!

My thoughts were no star for both. The 1886 looks decent to me, but too dark for a star. The 1884-O has some green, but it's not the right kind of green to draw a big premium or deserve a star in my opinion. I believe it might have a bit of textile (if you zoom in-or maybe I'm just seeing things ). Given that it was part of a hoard, that could help explain the leniency in the star (and the grading... @Pickin and Grinin I also thought both were weak for the 65 grade; I'd lean toward 64/64+).

 

@Coinsandmedals you can post the next coin whenever you're ready.

 

@ddddd thank you for the tag. Up next is an 1822 Ireland bronzed proof halfpenny. Currently, in a PCGS holder, but I am contemplating using my recent registry award credit to cross-over a couple of pieces for a shot at the star designation.

 

I really like the look of that one @Coinsandmedals and would personally say yes to a star.

However, from what I’ve seen, NGC does not seem to often give stars for proof coins with toning (at least compared to business strike examples). World coins in general also appear to be harder to get a star.

I likely would not cross that example since it would just be an extra expense for a coin that should be easily recognized as a premium example regardless of NGC or PCGS. I haven’t checked auction records, so if an NGC example in the same grade is worth quite a bit more than PCGS, it might be worthwhile.

 

@ddddd these are all fair points. I too have noticed their reservation with giving the star designation to world coins, particularly proofs. The tricky part about this coin is that it is the only bronzed example at either company. There are plenty of copper proofs. I have not looked into the difference the plastic makes for the copper examples, but that is a good point to investigate. I haven’t made up my mind yet, but I truly appreciate your input!

 

I would say yes as well. But I’d leave it in its current pcgs holder