Home U.S. Coin Forum

CACG, Cabinet friction, and early federal coinage

2»

Comments

  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 32,167 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Married2Coins said:

    @CaptHenway I have a fun question. Why did you choose AU-58 instead of AU-57? Or AU-57.5?

    I had previously chosen MS-63 because it was more than halfway between MS-60 and MS-65, and I wanted the new grade to be significantly better than the 60. Conversely, I went with MS-67 because the MS-70 grade looked virtually unobtainable, so 67 did look obtainable and besides it gave me two two-point steps (63-65-67) and I liked the symmetry.

    Therefore, 58 was significantly higher than 55, and closer to 60 than to 55 but just not quite there.

    I always wondered what numismatist would be bold enought to claim they "invented" the Au-58, MS-63, and MS-67 grades. CaptHenway is to be congratulated for this important contribution to our grading system! When I learned how to grade there was only MS-60 (uncirculated) , MS-65 (choice uncirculated), and MS-70 (perfect uncirculated); but MS-70 coins did not exist!

    We did not anticipate grading modern coins, and modern commemoratives issued in capsules and American bullion coins did not exist yet, so "MS-70" coins probably did not exist when I rewrote the Mint State grades.

    But "Proof-70" coins did!

    https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1101864/the-first-70-coin-ever-certified#latest

    Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.

Leave a Comment

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