Options
Guess The Grade - $20 Double Eagle
Leeroybrown
Posts: 429 ✭✭✭✭✭
Guess the grade on this $20 Double Eagle Liberty...
0
Leeroybrown
Posts: 429 ✭✭✭✭✭
Leeroybrown
Posts: 429 ✭✭✭✭✭
Leeroybrown
Posts: 429 ✭✭✭✭✭
Leeroybrown
Posts: 429 ✭✭✭✭✭
Guess the grade on this $20 Double Eagle Liberty...
Comments
MS61
AU58
MS-61
What's the deal with the first coin posted?
MS 60
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
Same Coin...
Baggy AU-53 so graded MS-60 but MS-60 no longer exists so I'll guess:
MS-61 also.
MS61
58
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
AU55 congrats!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
58
55 if gold CAC, 58 if not.
55
Something to think about:
I'm not picking on you three but this is for all of us to consider. IMO, when the ANA combined the number of marks on a coin with the amount of wear on a coin they forever "screwed the pooch."
These coins each have a little more wear from MS:
AU-58
AU-55
AU-53
AU-50
BUT an AU-58 (Very Choice) should have no major detracting contact marks. An AU-55 has above average surfaces.
The obverse of the OP's coin is beat up, so it is not choice.
See the problem graders face? The OP's coin looks/is "MS enough on the reverse; however, the obverse shows a change of color (wear) on the high points.
Thus, picking an AU grade is going to be a crap shoot. Perhaps that's why coins that were formerly graded AU are now very often graded as MS. Much easier to do and stay more or less consistent.
FWIW. .. I arrived at 58 after I noticed rub on the obverse. Before that, I was going to say 60 because of excessive contact marks. My calculus was that I had just downgraded it 2 pts...
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
First thought was a 61
I see evident wear on the coin; and with the amount of chatter, I'd say AU-55 tops.
55
Insider2- I also chose AU58... I have no experience at grading $20 libs but figured I’d give it a shot. I came to the AU58 grade because I don’t really see to much wear on the coin. I see a little on the hair so for me that made it a for sure AU. I see a "baggy" field on the obverse which I put at an AU55 but the reverse looks like it could be MS60 or so... So I went with AU58 overall. There seems to be a lot of luster from the pics to which made me feel it justified the higher AU grade.
...what would be the differences between these two coins in you all’s opinions?
...the coin on the right is the coin that we are “guessing the grade” on in this post... the coin on the left is another coin that I also own...
Any other guesses on the grade of the 1894 $20 ???
(PS. ...no one has guessed what the coin is actually graded yet...)
Trying again 62.
spend it.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
MS61
or coinstar it.
bob
Seen lots of these get 62 or 63 with lots of bag hits...my initial guess was 63, but didn’t like the distractions.
MS60
Dave
Thank you all for guessing. All guesses definitely confirmed what I believed to be true...
Please see the coin and grade below... love to know thoughts.
Holy cow Leeroy.... Do you have a Gold CAC tree out in the backyard???
Since it is an old rattler I'm guessing that they netted it for the scattered marks like those on and above the shield on reverse.
It's obviously nicer wear-wise. In the body bag days sometimes it seemed the grade was lowered for minor problems rather than body bagging.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
PCGS silently net graded it down due to excessive marks.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Nice coin Leeroy congratulation
So, different lighting can make the coin look that different? The features of the face: nose, chin, look so different.
The scratches stand out much differently between the two images.
Well....late to the game... again....Interesting range of guesses though...but got a gold CAC... so even they think it merits a higher grade. Cheers, RickO
Insider2 - sorry for my tardy response to your question re: AU58. I saw very slight wear (esp on the tips of the eagle's wings) so I knew the coin shouldn't be an MS. I really don't pay enough attention to how the grades really work (like AU58 being 'choice') and just assigned the grade that I thought was most appropriate.
BTW: I also agree with other posters that the coin was 'net' graded downward because of all the multiple hits.
The lighting you used to take the photos.
@WinLoseWin said: "Since it is an old rattler I'm guessing that they netted it for the scattered marks like those on and above the shield on reverse. It's obviously nicer wear-wise. In the body bag days sometimes it seemed the grade was lowered for minor problems rather than body bagging."
@PerryHall said: "PCGS silently net graded it down due to excessive marks."
Nope. This coin was graded after PCGS was started. They were strict in the beginning and back then, MS still = no trace of wear. Therefore, IMO the coin was not net graded due to the amount of wear. However I never worked at PCGS so its grade could have been dropped to an XF (Net graded) to reflect its value due to excessive marks. Most of you know that I believe net grading is STUPID, IGNORANT, FOLLY.
I was grading back then. This coin would have been graded AU-50 from 1972 to 1994 at every service I worked at during that time. A little rub = AU. Very many marks = 50.
The gold bean indicates that it is undergraded by today's standards. All of us agree.
I never claimed this coin was MS. The point I was trying to make is that it's an AU coin based on wear but it's worth XF money due to the excessive number of marks. Hence, it was graded as an XF. It's a case of market grading rather than technical grading.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Stage coach ride. MS45. Very nice.
100% Positive BST transactions
@PerryHall said: "I never claimed this coin was MS. The point I was trying to make is that it's an AU coin based on wear but it's worth XF money due to the excessive number of marks. Hence, it was graded as an XF. It's a case of market grading rather than technical grading."
Please don't fuss at me.
I can read.
Of course you didn't!!!! The slab is imaged as an XF. You commented that it was netted down. The grade above XF is AU, not MS. Wink, wink.
Wow!! PQ example for sure!!!
Of course the next question: Is the gold sticker worth more than the coin?
Wow definitely not a Xf 45. I was thinking it would be Ms 61
Dang! My guess was also 61. Cool pick up!
My YouTube Channel
I am trying to understand the information being discussed. Are we debating that wear alone is the only assessment to be made, and then isn't PMD technically wear?
Unless the grading companies add additional subcategories, other than established varieties, are we discussing the need for something like: AU 50 with excessive handling damage?
Isn't the XF45 sufficient for business strikes with no wear yet obvious PMD detractors?
Proofs may need to remain proofs, but do business strikes need to be protected as MS or AU regardless of PMD?
I agree that the coin is undergraded by today's standards, but to me the slab/sticker combo is more of a curiosity and conversation piece than a "value added" deal.
Not to be taking a dump on the OP's coin but it's essentially a billion coin whether or not it's XF or 62, stickered or stickerless.
But I guess in the days of sticker-mania someone would be willing to pay more for it?
.
@isaiah58 said: "I am trying to understand the information being discussed. Are we debating that wear alone is the only assessment to be made, and then isn't PMD technically wear?"
Absolutely NOT Wear and marks are two completely different things.
The way coins are graded has changed A LOT in the last 50+ years. Many professional graders/dealers were infants. LOL.
Fortunately, when you get the hang of the way coins are graded today, you'll realize that we live in "good times" and collectors have a "crutch" to keep them much safer than in the past.
Let me start this way. That coin was graded decades ago when grading was more strict. At the time, the XF grade was close enough BECAUSE THE TPGS WAS PLACING A COMMERCIAL VALUE on the coin. By trying to combine the value of a coin with the coin's actual condition of preservation from the way it left the coin press often introduces confusion. Thus, we can find examples of many coins that were graded XF long ago that are now in Mint State slabs to reflect their new $,$$$,$$$ value.
The OP's coin has an AU-58 amount of friction on its high spots. It was in that condition (and did not change!) when it was graded and ENCASED in plastic long ago YET the commercial graders needed to asses its value - thus XF. At the first Coin Grading Service, the coin would have been (technically graded) sent out as an AU-58, excessive marks. That is what it is now and was several decades ago. Technical grading did not change over time for any reason. We only graded coins. We did not assign values. Let the people who know the market conditions and a coin's desirability/rarity price them! Unfortunately, back then (and today) no dealer would have graded the coin AU-58 because an AU-58 at the time had virtually no marks. In fact, true AU-58s are commonly graded MS-Something today. The coin has a gold bean signifying it is undergraded by today's standards.
Marks on a coin will lower its grade in the MS range. Once a coin is circulated they influence the grade less and the amount of detail lost from wear becomes more important. This does not apply to Net
Grading.