<< <i>Your initial post to Lucy appeared to be a very transparent and inappropriate innuendo. It was also a failed attempt at humor, in my opinion, at least. Then you went on to act like Lucy misinterpreted what you wrote. I believe she was correct in her assessment. >>
No Mark - this isn't a false accusation - this is spot on. Berrydingle continues to live up to his name. He has posted numerous inflamatory remarks on threads that are either totally inapropriate or just plain insultive. It's this kind of nonesense that drags down the boards and makes people want to leave.
I hate to continue straying from the original post, but I for one will be watching this thread... waiting for berrydingle's apology to Lucy. If it never happens, then I guess we all know what he's really about.
<< <i>Whoa,easy kiddo Just saying that you like benjaman franklin half dollars and not standing liberty quarters. #1 looks full head next question, isn't there a bugs bunny variety on the franklin series and how did it get that way >>
OK you said what you had to say now take a hike or learn to be a Gentleman.
"The silver is mine and the gold is mine,' declares the LORD GOD Almighty."
In an attempt to get this thread back to coins....
barberlover - I did respond to your other post about mint state coins, as you requested.
LanLord - Sorry, the coins aren't available to ship to you.
Tom - You asked :
"For most dates/mints are MS coins normally struck with a full head or is it the exception?
Also, is it all or nothing in a FH designation with regard to its value, i.e. a just missed FH is no where near the value of a true FH?
I've heard of dish heads? What are those?"
Tom ,I did a quick check of the PCGS Population Report and only (3) Type 2 issues in the series (1917, 1929 and 1930) are more common with FH than without. All of the other issues are scarcer with FH than without, a number of them, dramatically so.
In the vast majority of cases, it is an all or nothing thing in a FH designation with respect to value. A coin with a 90% FH might sell for the same as one with a 50%, for example. For that reason, a just-miss FH example, that can be bought for a regular non-FH price can be a very attractive value, in my opinion.
Sorry, I don't know the answer to the dish head question.
jom - I can't / wont disagree with what you said. While the majority of buyers of these coins do seem to prefer FH examples, as I just mentioned, I like the value of non-FH pieces that have nearly FH detail and which can be bought for considerably less than one with a FH.
Spudmaster - thank you!
mdwoods - You said "I have seen FH coins with weak shields, and non FH coins with nice shields. "
That brings up an excellent point which others have alluded to in this thread. My feeling is that if you are going to pay a FH price, you should look for a coin which is well struck in other areas, too. Of course, that is easier said than done, as MANY FH examples are weakly struck in the shield area, particularly, the rivets. In fact, a number of issues in the series are almost impossible to locate with full shield detail.
Clarkoffkent Please don't PM me, I owe no one an apology and will not even consider your apology for calling me a derrogative profane name in a PM
Grow up, and move along and to the rest of you guys trying to stick up for someone as if they need a big brother, is down right embarresing, you come accross as if you wish to be seen as decent, while I had another post on an open forum for some xxx rated DVD's and my PM button lit up like a pinball machine from all of you hipocrits. NOW if you wish to chat about coins then do so, and save your meaningless tough guy comments for someone that cares, because I don't. Try to get in touch with reality. we are NOT stupid !!!
From the Offical ANA Grading Standards (4th Edition):
Full head features: All details in hair are well defined; hairline along face is rasied and complete; eyebrow is visible; cheek is rounded. Coins of any grade other than MS-70 coins can be assumed to lack full head details unless the amount of visible features are specifically designated.
The standards you quoted in the "Offical ANA Grading Standards (4th Edition)" are not utilized by the major grading services. If they were, we would not have any "FH" specimens, as no Standing Liberty quarters have been certified as MS70.
<< <i>jom - I can't / wont disagree with what you said. While the majority of buyers of these coins do seem to prefer FH examples, as I just mentioned, I like the value of non-FH pieces that have nearly FH detail and which can be bought for considerably less than one with a FH. >>
As long as the "majority" is wanting FH's then the non-FH's prices will stay cheap and, IMO, undervalued. Fine by me.
EDIT: The issue with SLQ's is the eye appeal. I mean, there is more of a problem with dark, ugly and dullard pieces in the series than there is with non vs FH. Another words: A nice lusterous SLQ with a "dished" head has FAR MORE eye appeal and harder to find overall than a dullard piece with a FH. So, again, to me the non-FH vs FH is secondary.
Mark: It is my understanding that the type I SLQ has a tougher threshold to attain FH than the type II's. I have followed this grading differential for many years and have noticed that very few collectors are aware of this.
Perhaps you can explain the different grading thresholds better than I can if you agree with my contention?
Nice thread here, can never thank you enough for your help on these threads.
No offense though I must disagree. The definitions for Ty. I full head seem much easier than Ty.II , especially when viewing the grading services "product" IMHO. Mark....? K
Hmm, interesting thread. I am surprised I missed it. I will have to blow up my toned SLQ (current sig pic) to see if it qualifies. It was encased in an older NGC holder which NGC may or may not have had the FH designation in place at the time it was graded.
I don't even know what the technical definition of a Full Head is for a T- l Standing Liberty quarter but I know one when I see it! And, as Nic said, they are actually much easier than T- ll's.
For the 1917 P, D and S T- l (I'm purposely excluding the 1916 from this discussion because the standard for them is different, altogether), PCGS has graded 7667 pieces, with 4671 or nearly 61% of them being classified as FH. Frankly, from my experience, I am surprised the % is not even higher. For the T- ll, PCGS has certified 33435, with 10432 or 31% being FH. That should tell you what you need to know - hopefully.
Here's a closer look of my toned SLQ. I don't think it is a FH. It might be if the toning were removed to reveal more details. Perhaps I may dip it just to find out for sure.
Comments
My guess is #2 isn't full head.
BTW I bought a 1928 raw sent it to PCGS.It vame back AU58 FH.I was amazed and pleased.
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
<< <i>Your initial post to Lucy appeared to be a very transparent and inappropriate innuendo. It was also a failed attempt at humor, in my opinion, at least. Then you went on to act like Lucy misinterpreted what you wrote. I believe she was correct in her assessment. >>
No Mark - this isn't a false accusation - this is spot on. Berrydingle continues to live up to his name. He has posted numerous inflamatory remarks on threads that are either totally inapropriate or just plain insultive. It's this kind of nonesense that drags down the boards and makes people want to leave.
Frank
is the fact that you have an appauling, inappropriate and poor sense of humour. Your are
indeed a candidate for the ferry to Troll Island. Women on this Forum are to be
treated with respect and decorum.Failing to adhere to rules of common decency
will make your stay on this Forum short and very unpleasent. Mend your ways
and appologize. While we know you are no gentleman, you appear to be no man
at all.
Camelot
That kinda crap really ticks me off!
<< <i>Whoa,easy kiddo
Just saying that you like benjaman franklin half dollars and not standing liberty quarters.
#1 looks full head
next question, isn't there a bugs bunny variety on the franklin series and how did it get that way >>
OK you said what you had to say now take a hike or learn to be a Gentleman.
"The silver is mine and the gold is mine,' declares the LORD GOD Almighty."
barberlover - I did respond to your other post about mint state coins, as you requested.
LanLord - Sorry, the coins aren't available to ship to you.
Tom - You asked :
"For most dates/mints are MS coins normally struck with a full head or is it the exception?
Also, is it all or nothing in a FH designation with regard to its value, i.e. a just missed FH is no where near the value of a true FH?
I've heard of dish heads? What are those?"
Tom ,I did a quick check of the PCGS Population Report and only (3) Type 2 issues in the series (1917, 1929 and 1930) are more common with FH than without. All of the other issues are scarcer with FH than without, a number of them, dramatically so.
In the vast majority of cases, it is an all or nothing thing in a FH designation with respect to value. A coin with a 90% FH might sell for the same as one with a 50%, for example. For that reason, a just-miss FH example, that can be bought for a regular non-FH price can be a very attractive value, in my opinion.
Sorry, I don't know the answer to the dish head question.
jom - I can't / wont disagree with what you said. While the majority of buyers of these coins do seem to prefer FH examples, as I just mentioned, I like the value of non-FH pieces that have nearly FH detail and which can be bought for considerably less than one with a FH.
Spudmaster - thank you!
mdwoods - You said "I have seen FH coins with weak shields, and non FH coins with nice shields. "
That brings up an excellent point which others have alluded to in this thread. My feeling is that if you are going to pay a FH price, you should look for a coin which is well struck in other areas, too. Of course, that is easier said than done, as MANY FH examples are weakly struck in the shield area, particularly, the rivets. In fact, a number of issues in the series are almost impossible to locate with full shield detail.
More later.......
Please don't PM me, I owe no one an apology and will not even consider your apology for calling me a derrogative profane name in a PM
Grow up, and move along and to the rest of you guys trying to stick up for someone as if they need a big brother, is down right embarresing, you come accross as if you wish to be seen as decent, while I had another post on an open forum for some xxx rated DVD's and my PM button lit up like a pinball machine from all of you hipocrits.
NOW if you wish to chat about coins then do so, and save your meaningless tough guy comments for someone that cares, because I don't.
Try to get in touch with reality. we are NOT stupid !!!
<< <i>we are NOT stupid !!! >>
How many of you are there? Is this the berrydingle who wants to
<< <i>chat about coins >>
or the one who wants to make innapropriate personal remarks on the forum?
At least I keep my unacceptable language private. And don't worry, I won't lose any sleep over your not even considering my apology.
you would have learned that #3 is not FH. You are really going to love your stay on Troll Island.
GROOOOWWWWWWWLLLLLLL
Camelot
From the Offical ANA Grading Standards (4th Edition):
Full head features: All details in hair are well defined; hairline along face is rasied and complete; eyebrow is visible; cheek is rounded. Coins of any grade other than MS-70 coins can be assumed to lack full head details unless the amount of visible features are specifically designated.
So it appears a FH desigination is pretty tough.
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
The standards you quoted in the "Offical ANA Grading Standards (4th Edition)" are not utilized by the major grading services. If they were, we would not have any "FH" specimens, as no Standing Liberty quarters have been certified as MS70.
<< <i>jom - I can't / wont disagree with what you said. While the majority of buyers of these coins do seem to prefer FH examples, as I just mentioned, I like the value of non-FH pieces that have nearly FH detail and which can be bought for considerably less than one with a FH. >>
As long as the "majority" is wanting FH's then the non-FH's prices will stay cheap and, IMO, undervalued. Fine by me.
EDIT: The issue with SLQ's is the eye appeal. I mean, there is more of a problem with dark, ugly and dullard pieces in the series than there is with non vs FH. Another words: A nice lusterous SLQ with a "dished" head has FAR MORE eye appeal and harder to find overall than a dullard piece with a FH. So, again, to me the non-FH vs FH is secondary.
jom
Perhaps you can explain the different grading thresholds better than I can if you agree with my contention?
Nice thread here, can never thank you enough for your help on these threads.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
I don't even know what the technical definition of a Full Head is for a T- l Standing Liberty quarter but I know one when I see it! And, as Nic said, they are actually much easier than T- ll's.
For the 1917 P, D and S T- l (I'm purposely excluding the 1916 from this discussion because the standard for them is different, altogether), PCGS has graded 7667 pieces, with 4671 or nearly 61% of them being classified as FH. Frankly, from my experience, I am surprised the % is not even higher. For the T- ll, PCGS has certified 33435, with 10432 or 31% being FH. That should tell you what you need to know - hopefully.
See some Awesome ones here
Don
and, as I believe,