Home U.S. Coin Forum

More Conservative Grading on High Value Coins?

RarityRarity Posts: 1,422 ✭✭✭✭

I notice many of the SS Central America $20 double eagles in AU50 or AU58 have much better strike than non SSCA coins. In fact, the AU58 below looks even better than many MS63/64 that I have seen.

And how could this almost perfect coin graded ms63?

Comments

  • This content has been removed.
  • PQueuePQueue Posts: 901 ✭✭✭

    You grade by seeing coins in hand, not by looking at pictures.

  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,145 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There was a recent thread here concerning a very rare draped bust half dollar with very heavy scratches that was straight graded so very rare coins aren't always conservatively graded.

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 13,516 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2020 3:08AM

    @PerryHall said:
    There was a recent thread here concerning a very rare draped bust half dollar with very heavy scratches that was straight graded so very rare coins aren't always conservatively graded.

    Agreed. And there are even some MAJOR rarities (such as 1913 Liberty nickels and 1804 dollars) about which some people have said the same.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 13,516 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Rarity said:
    I notice many of the SS Central America $20 double eagles in AU50 or AU58 have much better strike than non SSCA coins. In fact, the AU58 below looks even better than many MS63/64 that I have seen.

    And how could this almost perfect coin graded ms63?

    Strike will probably not affect grade on most AU coins.

    If CAC has thought the AU58 example you posted was significantly under-graded, they would have awarded it a gold sticker.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,145 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    @PerryHall said:
    There was a recent thread here concerning a very rare draped bust half dollar with very heavy scratches that was straight graded so very rare coins aren't always conservatively graded.

    Agreed. And there are even some MAJOR rarities (such as 1913 Liberty nickels and 1804 dollars) about which some people have said the same.

    The Dexter specimen of the 1804 silver dollar comes to mind. He punched a small D into one of the clouds and yet it's not mentioned on the slab label.

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Just looking at the pictures, I would agree with the assigned grades of the posted coins. True, in hand evaluation would be more accurate, but looking at the pictures, I note points that would justify the grades. Cheers, RickO

  • ReadyFireAimReadyFireAim Posts: 1,825 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2020 5:50AM

    Do you have high resolution image of the front & back?
    I don't have any problem grading from pictures but they have to be really good.

  • 291fifth291fifth Posts: 24,346 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I seem to recall seeing a rare seated quarter from the Garrett sale go from XF-45 (raw) to mint state (slabbed) over a period of 25 years or so.

    All glory is fleeting.
  • RarityRarity Posts: 1,422 ✭✭✭✭

    Thanks everyone and I appreciate all the points you raised. To be realistic, proper evaluation can only be achieved by having the coin in hand.

  • fathomfathom Posts: 1,700 ✭✭✭✭✭

    These discussions on grading bias come up often regarding inconsistencies. Grading is a living, breathing process according to market conditions, trends, criteria emphasis etc. If you saw the envelopes from the Newman sale they are almost laughable. Trying to compare different generations of opinion is futile. I know the technical purists don't want to hear it but certain criteria have changed in importance and will continue to change. That's life with a subjective exercise.

    BTW our host does an excellent job, they are the best, but always there is room for improvement, (and they know that).

  • ashelandasheland Posts: 23,190 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That's a nice 58!

  • dogwooddogwood Posts: 1,935 ✭✭✭✭

    The 51o in my opinion isn’t almost perfect. Granted it is surprisingly lacking big distracting digs often seen in gold, but I’d say the fields are as hairlined and scuffed as the 56s.
    The juicy photo kinda hides that at first glance.
    Both nice coins for sure.

    We're all born MS70. I'm about a Fine 15 right now.
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 33,990 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 22, 2020 1:37PM

    "In the good old days," (1960s and '70s) key dates and rarer coins were graded by loser standards. Some dealers freely admitted it.

    It was totally wrong in my opinion. You pay higher prices for better date coins. You should not get nicked twice by lower grading standards.

    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file