GTG 2002 Kennedys

Coinscratch

jedm

67+ and 66

Coinscratch

@jedm said:
67+ and 66

You're too nice

Extremeengineer

65 top, 64 bottom

ProofCollection

Wow, the TV image quality is not great on either. MS66 on the top, MS65 on the bottom.

Coinscratch

I guess theres> @ProofCollection said:

Wow, the TV image quality is not great on either. MS66 on the top, MS65 on the bottom.

TOP: Mine 66
BTM: CoinFacts 68

Here is my image before and after the trip. Kinda frustrating as 67 is my only requirement on this set and even if it upgraded it wouldn't be enough to cover regrading, I thought 67+ was a lock. There's some stuff going on on the cheek and the shield but I compared mine to the one in Coinfacts graded 68 and again...

ProofCollection

@Coinscratch said:
I guess theres> @ProofCollection said:

Wow, the TV image quality is not great on either. MS66 on the top, MS65 on the bottom.

TOP: Mine 66
BTM: CoinFacts 68

Here is my image before and after the trip. Kinda frustrating as 67 is my only requirement on this set and even if it upgraded it wouldn't be enough to cover regrading, I thought 67+ was a lock. There's some stuff going on on the cheek and the shield but I compared mine to the one in Coinfacts graded 68 and again...

Yeah the coinfacts one is a fluke, it is no 68. As I stated I put it at 65 due to the number or marks on the cheek, neck, and the shield has a series of marks that in my experience puts it in the 65/66 category.
Now that I pull yours up with a higher res photo, I think the shield just has too many marks for a 67 as again in my experience a 67 has to have a fairly clean shield. I'm not sure what is going on with the neck and the Kennedy's rash and how that affects grade but the obverse is pretty nice otherwise although there's a decent hit in Kennedy's hair below the E that is well disguised but it is there.

Coinscratch

@ProofCollection said:

@Coinscratch said:
I guess theres> @ProofCollection said:

Wow, the TV image quality is not great on either. MS66 on the top, MS65 on the bottom.

TOP: Mine 66
BTM: CoinFacts 68

Here is my image before and after the trip. Kinda frustrating as 67 is my only requirement on this set and even if it upgraded it wouldn't be enough to cover regrading, I thought 67+ was a lock. There's some stuff going on on the cheek and the shield but I compared mine to the one in Coinfacts graded 68 and again...

Yeah the coinfacts one is a fluke, it is no 68. As I stated I put it at 65 due to the number or marks on the cheek, neck, and the shield has a series of marks that in my experience puts it in the 65/66 category.
Now that I pull yours up with a higher res photo, I think the shield just has too many marks for a 67 as again in my experience a 67 has to have a fairly clean shield. I'm not sure what is going on with the neck and the Kennedy's rash and how that affects grade but the obverse is pretty nice otherwise although there's a decent hit in Kennedy's hair below the E that is well disguised but it is there.

Yes, I really need to quit looking at Coinfacts as a gauge. That one was obviously graded by a newbie.

jedm

Remember, the grade of a coin is an opinion not necessarily a fact.

Fraz

I don’t reconcile the forum GTG coins well with CoinFacts either.

Coinscratch

@Fraz said:
I don’t reconcile the forum GTG coins well with CoinFacts either.

Yeah typically I have to back up a few feet from the computer to kind of see the coin at the right size. Otherwise I may get caught up in the hits and completely miss the hammered strike or eye appeal.
But on this particular case the strikes look pretty much the same, and there is plenty of places for hits to hide on this coin, and I have to remember I’m not the professional either.

ChrisH821

I have a feeling that PCGS has been... harsh lately.

ProofCollection

@ChrisH821 said:
I have a feeling that PCGS has been... harsh lately.

Yeah, compared to earlier this year, I had a few come back extra tight in the last few months.