[Grade Revealed] Guess the Grade - 1809 50c

CircCam

Note: The slab has scattered marks, the line through the corner of liberty’s eye is on the slab for example and scuffed areas above the eagle’s neck on the reverse and on the shield are also on the slab.

CircCam

And a normal cell shot of the slab for reference. Note it is not white balanced like the mains.

Mr_Spud

30

JBN

45

Smudge

30

pursuitofliberty

Lovely looking coin. Looks like some nice soft luster remaining. If it grades what I think it grades, it's premium. I always have issues with 09's though.

Put me down for 40 (or really, 43.2765).

may

50, I see some luster.

Pnies20

🤐

Edit: to be clear this means I know the grade already.

fluffy155

I like it at 45, but I could see it as a 50 on the right day.

VanHalen

I'm not a fan of those services. That said it probably straight graded as a xf40. Likely a net grade.

Copperindian

40

LJenkins11

45. The wear on the neck, left wing and talons can be very misleading but the surfaces looks really good.

relicsncoins

I'll say 50. Seems like a lot of luster for an EF coin.

jdillane

I'll guess she got a 30 despite the EF+ luster.

I was looking at an F12 1809 this morning in an anacs soapbox that has EF luster.

jdillane

It is a nice O-103. They typically have weak obverse centers.

Atcarroll

XF. Or XF details. I don't know if the cleaning would get a pass, it's likely, since it wasn't an abrasive cleaning.

jughead1893

@pursuitofliberty said:
Lovely looking coin. Looks like some nice soft luster remaining. If it grades what I think it grades, it's premium. I always have issues with 09's though.

Put me down for 40 (or really, 43.2765).

I was gonna say 49.7 but I didn't know if it would be ok

jesbroken

I see it as a VF35.
Jim

Coinscratch

I don't have a clue how to grade these but, since I've been playing "Guess That Grade"

I'll go 53.

Manifest_Destiny

40

Herb_T

30

MFeld

I’ll go with XF45 (edited to add: and I’d grade it 50 before I would 40 or lower).

Based on the coin’s detail and apparent luster, I’m surprised that there are currently five VF guesses.

jacrispies

AU-50. Bleeding luster!

marcmoish

45, and a lovely pc at that.

Davidk7

It SHOULD be like a 40 BUT I promise PCGS called this a 30, maybe a 35.

asheland

My thought was 40. Cool coin. 👍

CircCam

For those who guessed VF30, could you please share your reasoning?

Thanks for playing, all.

CircCam

@Davidk7 said:
It SHOULD be like a 40 BUT I promise PCGS called this a 30, maybe a 35.

In analyzing the grades on coins like this, what occurs to me is that on circulated coins struck with missing detail to begin with, it is impossible for the graders to say for sure what is wear vs. as-struck, and they have to draw the line somewhere.

I have several coins like this, but I have to say this is the most dramatic instance of it on any coin I’ve owned.

MFeld

@Davidk7 said:
It SHOULD be like a 40 BUT I promise PCGS called this a 30, maybe a 35.

Very good call, as opposed to my very bad one.😬

BillJones

I guess they graded the coin according to the (lack of) sharpness of the bust detail on the obverse. The mint surfaces around the stars didn't mean anything to them.

This is really market grading. If it had been called an AU because of the mint luster, it would have been a much less desirable AU than one which had been fully struck.

Overall it's not something I would buy because of the color. It's obviously been dipped, and it's not the look you get with the normal AU coin that has been dipped, like this one.

pursuitofliberty

@Davidk7 said:
It SHOULD be like a 40 BUT I promise PCGS called this a 30, maybe a 35.

Heck of a call David @Davidk7

I did not know the grade and was torn between 40 and 45, both of which would have seemed reasonable to me. Calling it a 30, even with the confirmation of a green bean, seems to show a lack of understanding for the series and some of the Die Marriages.

Pnies20

@CircCam said:

@Davidk7 said:
It SHOULD be like a 40 BUT I promise PCGS called this a 30, maybe a 35.

In analyzing the grades on coins like this, what occurs to me is that on circulated coins struck with missing detail to begin with, it is impossible for the graders to say for sure what is wear vs. as-struck, and they have to draw the line somewhere.

I have several coins like this, but I have to say this is the most dramatic instance of it on any coin I’ve owned.

Frequently varieties of 1809 are softly struck in different areas like the chin and left wing. If the majority of coins of a particular variety are weakly struck for whatever reason, I wish they would not grade those coins based on that.

This particular coin looks like the grade is attributed to wear. It looks fairly even, especially the feathers in the reverse. Now that I’m looking at all the photos, VF30-35 seems accurate despite the luster.

VanHalen

@BillJones said:

Overall it's not something I would buy because of the color. It's obviously been dipped, and it's not the look you get with the normal AU coin that has been dipped, like this one.

My thought was it spent too long in acid. The surfaces are not good.

CircCam

@BillJones said:
I guess they graded the coin according to the (lack of) sharpness of the bust detail on the obverse. The mint surfaces around the stars didn't mean anything to them.

This is really market grading. If it had been called an AU because of the mint luster, it would have been a much less desirable AU than one which had been fully struck.

Overall it's not something I would buy because of the color. It's obviously been dipped, and it's not the look you get with the normal AU coin that has been dipped, like this one.

Good point on the market grading aspect, thank you for sharing.

In regard to the second, to each his own… I’ll gladly take any “dipped out VF30’s” that look like this though.

Pnies20

@CircCam said:

@BillJones said:
I guess they graded the coin according to the (lack of) sharpness of the bust detail on the obverse. The mint surfaces around the stars didn't mean anything to them.

This is really market grading. If it had been called an AU because of the mint luster, it would have been a much less desirable AU than one which had been fully struck.

Overall it's not something I would buy because of the color. It's obviously been dipped, and it's not the look you get with the normal AU coin that has been dipped, like this one.

Good point on the market grading aspect, thank you for sharing.

In regard to the second, to each his own… I’ll gladly take any “dipped out VF30’s” that look like this though.

Very attractive coin, imo.

MapsOnFire

it is impossible for the graders to say for sure what is wear vs. as-struck

Then they should not be grading.

Herb_T

I went with 30 because of the amount of wear on the cheek and the overall wear on the reverse. I was torn between 25 and 30, ultimately picking 30. Also the broach is rubbed pretty good where there are no longer lines on it on the obverse.

Mr_Spud

I went with 30 after comparing it to my 35 bust half and comparing Liberty’s hair details and wear in the eagles wings

TennesseeDave

I was thinking AU because the fields show only minimal wear. I think the coin was weakly struck. I'm surprised it did not receive a gold sticker at VF-30.