Double Guess the Grade (toned 1901-O Morgan) [revealed in comments]
U1chicago
Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭✭✭
Why double guess the grade? Well I found out this same coin was graded by both NGC and PCGS.
So please guess what each grading company gave the coin.
Photos below are a PCGS TrueView and a GC GreatPhoto.
2
Comments
PCGS MS63
NGC MS63*
Pcgs 63
Ngc 64
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
Ms 63 both pcgs, ngc
I think both graded it MS 65 but whichever one gives + marks. that one gave a +. James
NGC 64+
PCGS 63
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7
63 for PCGS, 63* for NGC
Mr_Spud
PCGS 63
NGC 63
Those are my guesses, as well.
seatedlib3991 Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭✭✭ October 25, 2025 6:41AM
I think both graded it MS 65 but whichever one gives + marks. that one gave a +. James
Both companies use plus grading.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
reveal after some more guesses
MS63 on both is my guess.
In that case they both gave a star. james
Both companies use “+” grades but only NGC awards the “Star” designation.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Both 63 , NGC gave it a + is my guess
NGC 64 PCGS 63+
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
NGC 61*
PCGS 64+
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
NGC 64* PCGS 64
And the reveal....it was an NGC MS 62 and became a PCGS MS 64. I'm ok with the 64 grade while the 62 seem a tad low; maybe one can split the difference and say 63 wouldn't be unreasonable. I was not the one who sent it in either time. Interestingly enough it sold for more in the NGC 62 holder than the PCGS 64 holder (although there was an in between sale in that same PCGS 64 holder that was higher than the NGC 62 sale).
Although my guess was M63, I think MS62 would be more appropriate/deserved than MS64.
Edited to add: Still, if NGC was making use of the “Star” designation at the time the coin was graded, I’m surprised it wasn’t designated as such.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
This is a scenario I have seen many times. People think NGC is so lose with their grading. Last year I sent in 20 coins to NGC and I could not believe how tight they were.
I look at these coins and while they are nice why no star designation?
PCGS looser than NGC on this coin?
I wonder how often this happens.
Make no mistake about it I have PCGS in the #1 slot as far as grading goes but this is a total contradiction of my opinion.
So the point being that both companies can be loose.
I guess it just depends on whose grading that day.
BTW the coin looks so much better in the PCGS holder IMHO.
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7
Time factor = gradeflation ??
Successful BST Transactions: erwindoc, VTchaser, moursund, robkool, RelicKING, Herb_T, Meltdown, ElmerFusterpuck, airplanenut
Way more often that many around here would admit or like. Of course then the kool aid kicks in and they rationalize it with comments like; it depends on the day or the grader that day, or it should have been the PCGS grade anyway.
The coin did not change, just the photo did. It is way overgraded at 64.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
I’ve seen worse in 64 holders and wouldn’t say it is way overgraded. It’s a 63 with a one point color bump to 64. Way over would be 3+ points off and this is not a 61 as the luster is solid and there aren’t as many contact marks as one would normally see on a 61.
And it’s true that it does not look better in the PCGS holder. The photos were done differently by GC. I like the look of a coin in all sorts of holders as long as the coin is appealing (like this one).
The color is a + but that is 1 deep, long scrap on the cheek and a some baginess on the nose and lower jaw. 62 is the right grade but a + or * is warranted.
LOl this just proves its like shooting darts with these grades. LMAO
I hear this excuse way too often "I've seen worse" that is just a way to rationalize the given grade and exonerate the TPG that didn't do its job properly. Of course many have seen worse or better, that is not the point, each coin must be graded on that coin's merits and warts not on how two or three people think it ranks against other coins. A grading company is supposed to be a neutral third party, but market grading is not neutral and it is not really grading it is pricing. Anyone that learned to grade from current market grading is likely to see this as a 64, but for those like myself that learned to grade old school this is way over graded. While I was very close to what each TPG assigned my guesses were not what I would personally grade this coin. This is at best a 62 properly graded, period full stop, NGC got it right or closer. This nonsense that a coin should get a color bump has nothing to do with grading a coin and everything to do with pricing a coin (i.e. market grading). I'm not even fully convinced this is actually mint state, strip off that color and you might find this is really an AU, who can really tell from these static photos with all that tarnish. So my grade guesses were formed from what I know about the two TPG's, PCGS loves color so much that the strike, surface, or any real grading criteria is thrown out in favor of the color. That's why I knew PCGS was at least at 64, just surprised they didn't tack on the + or go 65. But give it enough submissions and I'm sure that this coin will get bumped up sometime in the future.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
@coinbuf
When I said it looks so much better in the pcgs holder I meant the holder and coin combination. I wasn't speaking of the grade.
I really like the gold shield holders with any coin in them.
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7
I'm not excusing the TPGs; I'm just saying what I have seen. I have been critical of the "standards" but also realize that most of the original standards were thrown out long ago. With much of grading, color bumps and market grading is the standard. Sometimes it is over the top but other times it isn't too far off. Generally, one has to deal with the current "standards" or else it becomes difficult to buy any coins (especially in the higher-end toned arena).
Great example of a bad move, cracking out this fatty that maybe had a good chance of being beaned at 62 versus present tomb...gosh...for a shot at what grade? Only 66 would have made financial sense, and there is no way this would have gone 66, however the fatty beaned now are you talking.
It was not an NGC slab that garners a premium (generally this is considered the generation after the fatty slab). And the coin did sell for about $350 more a year after it was auctioned in the NGC slab. So if the person that got the upgrade was the one that sold it in the auction and only sent it in once, they made some money.
got it, my bad, nice thread btw.
no worries...I agree that there are cases where a coin is better off not being upgraded (like certain older holders).