What makes for MS65

hookooekoo

The A.N.A. Grading Standards for MS65 states the following for contact marks for a coin to be graded MS65 Light and scattered without major distracting marks in the prime focal areas.

If that is the case, how did the following coin wind up in an NGC holder as MS65?

MS65 View #1
MS65 View #2

Now I have to admit that the coin seems to have ausome luster (that you just can't see in the picture) with a strong strike (FB designation). But that major mark on the jaw line would seem to force the coin to grade no higher than MS64.

Can anyone offer some feedback to help a newbie (as far as MS grading is concerned)?

TomB

I think a major conceptual problem that many collectors and dealers have with respect to third party certification is the erroneous idea that the grading services adhere to the letter of the ANA Grading Guide. They simply don't. They grade in a similar manner to the guidelines put out by the ANA but they aren't strict in the following of many sentences in the book.

jom

I wouldn't say that is a "major" mark on the jaw. It is more of a discoloration to me...but then again it's only a scan. I'd have to see the real coin to know for sure.

jom

stman

Sometimes the balance of the whole coin is taken into consideration. And like you said great luster, great strike. I have learned for myself to take the balance of the whole coin and it helps. If I didn't I wouldn't find any coins that I would like. But I also agree that the mark is distracting and really shows up on a small coin

stman

Gilbert

Hookooekoo

You also have to consider that most if not all grading services are "market" grading, and, grading by the book is essentially technical grading. With that in mind, let me pose this question to you: if this dime looks better than all the MS64 mercury dimes you have seen, how do you express that? I believe that when a large number of a particular series and date exists, grading of that series and date is done on a continuum.

Your expectations within a grade must be considered relative to the series and date being evaluated. Another note of great importance is one must also consider that defects prior to striking are not judged in the same manner as post strike defects. One glaring example is a MS65 State Quarter is not necessarily what we have come to expect a "gem unc" coin to look like. So many of the SQ come with planchet defects that make the coin look extremely baggy, however, since they are the result of lower striking pressure (not enough to "iron out" the planchet striations) they are not as heavily penalized as a coin that may look as scruffy, but results from coin to coin contact. That coin will probably not receive a MS65 grade.

shylock

Stman and Gilbert make great points. In most cases grading is done instinctually in a matter of seconds, with the grader using his experience relative to the series more than the ANA guidelines -- the continuum Gilbert mentions. Sometimes other aspects of a coin are so strong it will 65 even with a mark in the focal area -- the balance Stman mentions. There are many MS65 Indian Heads with nicks or light contact in the cheek, a good portion of which are so solid in other technical areas they would otherwise grade MS66.

As much as we'd like it to, one set of rules does not fit all. It's not until you actually try to write "what MS65 is" do you realize how many variables play into it and how many exceptions there are to almost every guideline.