How many points, if any, does a strike through affect technical grade? 1950-D Franklin Half
PocketArt
Posts: 1,335 ✭✭✭✭✭
What appears in hand as a minor strike through debris, or, perhaps a planchet defect is a mint made blemish between the "E" and "R" of Liberty on the obverse.
The coin has beautiful toning which is better in hand...not that you have heard that before. 
Question: Does the blemish effect technical grade? If so, by how many points south of technical? Thank you.
2
Comments
A Strike thru has absolutely no effect on a true technical grade. Neither does a HOLE. If I were to take your coin and saw it in half, its TRUE "TECHNICAL" grade would be: Choice Unc (MS-65), sawed in half.
Unfortunately, the folks who toss out "technical grade" have no clue what it actually was. The technical grade of your coin (if that system was still being used) would be: MS-65, FBL, toned, spotted and struck through. This grade would stay forever. NOW, does everyone see why no one uses technical grading anymore and very few understand it?
The system was devised to identify/describe coins, not to value them.
Uh... no. It would body bag or be graded MS details. Technical grading absolutely considers all post strike damage so sawing it in half necessarily reduces its technical grade.
Your post proves my point. MOST FOLKS have no clue what the "true" (ORIGINAL) technical grading system is, was, why it was devised, what it was used for, etc.
If I take an MS-70 coin and saw it in half with a laser leaving two pristine halves, describe the coin to a person who cannot see it with YOUR IDEA of a technical grade. You see, ANY coin can be graded and described - damaged, worn, or whatever.
Let's start with a MUCH EASIER coin first. Describe a Perfect MS-70 coin with a 1/8th inch hole in it at 12 O'clock. What is its true technical grade? It will be different than the value grade of this cull.
If sawing a coin in half doesn't affect the grade than neither would wear, bag marks, hairlines, reduced luster, etc. By that definition, every coin is a "MS70" or "PF70."
By that logic, every coin would be MS 70 with [insert post mint flaws here]. As a simple example, MS 70 with eight bag marks.
Choice Numismatics www.ChoiceCoin.com
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
We are NOT DISCUSSING commercial coin grading. I'm trying to end the MISUSE of the word "technical" applied to ANY GRADING by folks who through the fault of the ANA became misinformed. It's like the inventor of the Apple Operating System having his system completely revised and perverted yet still being identified as the Apple System.
The original ANA grading guide is not the "Technical" Grading System!
Back to the OP's coin and whether the planchet defect affected its grade.
I don't think so. If there is suspicion about a lower than expected grade it has more to do with the uneven obverse toning and the unfortunate spotting on the reverse. Based on the images I'd say it has below average eye appeal.
Lance.
I think I'm going to disagree here. Awhile back I had a PCGS PF64 Trade Dollar that was basically flawless. No hairlines or marks whatsoever and looked like a 66-67 coin. BUT...It had a lint strike through in the Right Obv. Field. IMHO PCGS downgraded it for the strike through. It was actually kind of neat...looked like a little curled up worm in the field.
I do not think the strike through has as much effect as the weak strike, scrapes on lapel, and dark spots on reverse.
I can’t fathom the coin being downgraded by more than a point for that. So I suspect that though you thought it was otherwise a 66 or 67, PCGS probably disagreed.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Hmmm, The area affected in the field was around the size of the date to put it in perspective. I always wondered what it would've graded if it had been submitted as an error.
Thanks all for your insight. I understand from comments that the strike through "probably" won't effect a grade. The reverse picture wasn't the best, a bit blurry yet the strike is solid. FBL. Nice luster too, and yes some fly specks. Reverse rim is nicely toned. Not as bad in hand. I'll keep this one in my binder after neutralized in acetone. Not worth grading expense yet a nice original example.
Strike thru's are Mint made DEFECTS. If they are large and detracting they usually raise the VALUE of a coin to error collectors. However, as defects, a large one in a bad position will lower the coin's desirability and Commercial grade. Very tiny strike thru's are tolerated on MS-70 Silver eagles. In our old (obsolete) true "technical" grading system used at the first TPGS (INSAB), a struck thru did not change the grade at all;however, it was mentioned: Gem Unc, struck thru.
Large wholesale buyers of silver dollars make a butt load of profits pulling out major struck thru errors that uninformed dealers pass through thinking they are getting over by selling defective coins. LOL. Ignorance is bliss.
The slash across the face bothers me more.
I wonder if soaking in acetone a couple days and then rolling with cotton tipped wood swab would remove some of those dark specks?
Probably not. In my limited experience, Acetone has never removed corrosion.
I am aware; however, technical grading also considers faults. If it doesn't then there would be no logical basis to distinguish among various exemplars.
The original technical grading system DID ACKNOWLEDGE FAULTS but they had no effect on the coin's grade.
They were mentioned separately - similar to what is now being done by the TPGS's with detail grades.
So we have come around full circle in about twenty years' time from 1973 to the early 90's when PCI started slabbing problem coins (the red "banknote border" label) and stating the problem.
Modern services do the same. Remember, true technical grading was developed to identify a coin and its condition of preservation. Coins were not "net" graded either. I've given examples of actual technical grading in this forum before. Take a 2020 MS-70 SE and put a hole in it. Commercially. it is a cull destined to be melted. "Technically," it is an MS-70, holed.
I do not expect any knowledgeable numismatists to understand this because they were not there when this system was in use and worked precisely as it was intended with no changes over time.