How Could PCGS call this a 66???

airplanenut

link

My raw one looks like this- and dare it get a 63! This grading is on par with ACG!!!

Whitewashqtr

I actually like that coin. The fact that you really cant see it well from the scan makes it impossible to judge. It looks like it is close to a 66, but who knows.

Blade

That is a coin I would want to see in person. I keep hearing how DMPLs accentuate hits and are graded on a different scale than non-mirrored Morgans. Perhaps this is in line with DMPL grading standards? Or maybe that Naples II pedigree gave it a boost.

Russ

From what I've heard around here, this seller is the king of resubmissions so he frequently has coins that are maxed out, or low end for the grade.

Russ, NCNE

airplanenut

<< <i>That is a coin I would want to see in person. I keep hearing how DMPLs accentuate hits and are graded on a different scale than non-mirrored Morgans. Perhaps this is in line with DMPL grading standards? Or maybe that Naples II pedigree gave it a boost. >>

I was thinking the latter- nice coin, yes... but the fields look so banged up and the cheek is hit, too...

LanLord

<< <i>

<< <i>That is a coin I would want to see in person. I keep hearing how DMPLs accentuate hits and are graded on a different scale than non-mirrored Morgans. Perhaps this is in line with DMPL grading standards? Or maybe that Naples II pedigree gave it a boost. >>

I was thinking the latter- nice coin, yes... but the fields look so banged up and the cheek is hit, too... >>

Scans can be trickey, I have a couple coins that everytime I scan them I see stuff on them that isn't there when I look at the coin in hand. If the light is from one specific angle there could appear some detracting mark like on Anna's face there.

Just a thought.

DCAMFranklin

PCGS doesn't make mistakes with the 1883-CC DMPL............Hello? Is that you ANNA?........ya, ya, ya!

FC57Coins

DMPL's and PL's do show hits more readily than regular frosted morgans, as such I think that PCGS takes this into account when grading. You can see the hits a lot more on the prooflikes, but the awesomeness of the mirrors, especially on a cameo coin, can more than make up for the hits. I've also heard that PCGS is a little more linient on Carson City dollars because so many of them have a great deal of handling (bag) marks, but I've only heard that from a couple of dealers - some of you morgan experts might want to shed some light on this last statement.

Thanks

Frank

coingame2000

I've seen this particular coin on more than one occasion and it is very nice. Unfortunately the image doesn't do it justice and makes it appear more marky (particularly in the fields) than it actually is. PCGS accurately graded this piece in my opinion. By the way...Mike Casper didn't upgrade this coin.

Best Regards,

Mike De Falco

IrishMike

Thanks for the post Mike, I was hoping that someone who had seen it would post. Didn't you own it at one time? Lesson here is never try to grade a DMPL via a scan or picture. And they do show a lot more of the hits on a Morgan, that is why some of us prefer not to collect them. Looks like a solid 66 DMPL.

braddick

Here's a little secret that used to serve me well: I'd buy all the DMPL CC (or, really any other) OLD PCI labeled Morgans I could find. As much as the OLD PCI used to mess up with grades, they were very HARSH on these DMPL's! They would grade the coin a point or two (or three!) from what the coin could max with PCGS.

More marks are acceptable on these mirrors then you would normally think.

Oh, I used to also do this little trick (has to be the "OLD" PCI- the 'new' PCI is whacked)- buy up the 22 no MM cents. PCI would call a VF25 coin VG, at times.
Cool.

nwcs

Remember that there is also a bit of market grading going on. Eye appeal, which this coin has in spades!, can raise a grade by up to 1-3 points in a market system.