Why is PCGS so hard on the 1920 Saint?

I'm on to the 1920 now & see coins that are one grade lower than they look quite often.
The 1912 has nearly the same grade population as the 1920 and appears over graded a lot.

What gives?
What is PCGS's record for regrade from MS63 to MS64?

I bought a coin that I wouldn't normally look at because it was a MS63.
(Don't have it yet)

BTW...1st post and I'm trying to put together a -6 date collection of Saints averaging MS 65.5
(For non-Saint collectors, It's one of each date regardless of mint & not including "The-Hole", "Three Sisters", "Crash Coin" or the "Secret Service Invite")

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Welcome in the neighborhood, St Gaudens collection.
I made my own experiences in this series.
Actually I own just four pieces.
The 1920 ist very taff in 64 and especially in 65. Good Luck in finding one!!

 

It seems strange because it's 64+ looking in condition but otherwise sort of uninteresting.

I would normally have passed on a 63 but it looks pretty nice.
Not a high rez pic but I think you can see what I'm talking about.

 

Here is a 1912 MS64+ very similar to mine that looks about same as the 1920...Or not?
What is your opinion?

 

Here is a 1920 MS64 I'd grade as a 65.

 

While they don't give the reverses enough respect in grading (and they should, and I like the reverse of the coins) please show both sides of your coins.
The last photo, post #6 seems very nice. I agree on the 65.
As for the other two, I do see a difference between them, with the 63 showing more bag marks than the 64+.

 

Not my coin but here it goes.

 

Is it possible that that hit on the sun is worse than it looks in this image?

 

I had to think about this for a bit.
This is apparently a coin with exceptional luster.

And then I found this. (go to 4:08)

Apparently PCGS assigns 15% weight to this during grading & poor examples of luster will not grade above MS63 regardless of condition.

This now makes sense to me after hearing what ToughCOINS had to say about the mintage year of 1920.
I had assumed that all Saints had an equal distribution of luster characteristics throughout.

 

Thank you!
I'd also like a book recommendation if you have one.

This luster issue has never popped up before.
I started with the best 1907 I could afford and moved on to the next later date.
When i got to 1912, I could only get a 64+ because the MS65 was too expensive.
I just picked the the prettiest coin graded at least MS65 and relied on PCGS to keep me from making a mistake.
When a bunch of cheap MS63 coins looked better in a picture than my expensive 1912 MS64+, I kinda freaked out. (the reason for this post)

It should be smooth sailing for me from 1922 to the crash coin with all being MS66 or better.

 

Sub par luster will definitely rightfully so limit the grade I think ToughCoins nailed that in this case.

A series like 3 cent silver coins where the strike and surfaces all look very similar luster is about the only thing differentiating the gem +s and lower MS coins.

Personally I'll take a coin loaded with contact marks but with blazing luster over a contact free dull coin.

 

Book ordered and PM sent.
Thank you for the recommendation.

 

The 1920 MS63 is on the way and I'm rather curious about its luster or lack thereof.
Everything I have so far exhibits wagon-wheel characteristics so it will be an interesting coin to compare.

I'll post my findings after receiving it.

 

Good luck!

 

Cart wheel?
I guess that's the same thing, half a dozen of one, six of the other.
Some people get their pop in a sack, and others their soda in a bag.

 

Cart-wheels are for smaller coins.
These are Wagon-Wheels!

Check this video out (full screen it & do what it instructs you to do)


Serious MS70 Saint Gaudens 20$ gold kind of trippy.