1920-D PCGS Lincoln Cent. What would YOU grade it and What did PCGS grade it?

braddick

A little bit of a twist on the GTG. I'd be interested in your grade, based on the TrueView and then
your opinion on what PCGS graded this.
Both grades may match, no problem. Or your GTG might be a bit higher than the awarded grade or
vise versa.

braddick

If it helps. . . the seller's pics:

AUandAG

That reverse die sure needed replacing....
MS62brown

bob
vegas, baby!

jughead1893

62

dcarr

ME: MS60 RB (very worn dies, especially the reverse) .
PCGS: MS61 RB .

robec

64BN

originalisbest

63bn

Rexford

Looks like a 63, and I would guess it’s in a 63 holder.

braddick

I would have been way off with my guess.
I'd have gone MS60 and would think PCGS would also state MS60 BR

You guys are good at looking at the totality of the coin and then passing judgement/grade.
(That's a trait I still need to learn.)

robec

I might have said lower if not for my 1919-D, which looks similar and is graded 64+BN.

Rexford

60 is generally a grade reserved for borderline details coins - a worn die won’t make a coin a 60. The surface preservation of this coin is Choice MS.

291fifth

They can call it 63 if they want ... but I'd never pay anything close to 63 money for it. In fact. I probably wouldn't even make an offer on it.

coinbuf

Rexford in his post has perfectly explained how this was market graded and the grade inflated to price the coin at the level the submitter wanted. It should be graded as AU58 as no coin should receive a mint state grade with an incomplete strike, perfect example of what is wrong with grading today.

There are many dates in the Lincoln series (and most series); especially in the 20's branch mint coins; where examples can be found where either the obv or rev die was over used and the coin will show an incomplete strike on one side, just as we see with this coin. But that is not a good reason to lower the standard just to fit the price or needs of the submitter, full and completely struck examples are available.

This coin in my collection will not win any beauty pageants that is for sure, but it does have a well executed strike on both sides of the coin and is deserving of the MS64RB grade it received from PCGS.

Rexford

@coinbuf said:
Rexford in his post has perfectly explained how this was market graded and the grade inflated to price the coin at the level the submitter wanted. It should be graded as AU58 as no coin should receive a mint state grade with an incomplete strike, perfect example of what is wrong with grading today.

There are many dates in the Lincoln series (and most series); especially in the 20's branch mint coins; where examples can be found where either the obv or rev die was over used and the coin will show an incomplete strike on one side, just as we see with this coin. But that is not a good reason to lower the standard just to fit the price or needs of the submitter, full and completely struck examples are available.

This coin in my collection will not win any beauty pageants that is for sure, but it does have a well executed strike on both sides of the coin and is deserving of the MS64RB grade it received from PCGS.

That’s very ironic, because market grading would be to call this coin an AU58 due to a weak strike, simply because some would see it is less desirable. AU and UNC are levels of surface preservation, and AU implies wear, which this coin does not have.

Technical grading, which attempts to objectively approach the amount of wear on a coin, would be to call this coin Choice MS, because it has the surface preservation of a Choice MS - which is what happened.

braddick

Here is another one I'd have gotten completely wrong.
I would have guessed AG03 with a PCGS grade of GD4.
Instead it is a VG10: