grade the WLH....please

cohodk

Very clean surfaces.

kieferscoins

Hard to tell the luster because the pic is dark but it is MS-64 - MS-65 quality.

Cameron Kiefer

cohodk

yea I know it is dark.. Luster is quite strong. I think thats why parts of the coin are so dark. too much light reflection

kidd

I agree that it should be ms64 or 65

poorguy

Maybe those are knicks on the eagle's leg. If you got it for 64 money, you did pretty good. The spread between 64 and 65 is pretty nice and it's definitely high end if it's 64.

I'm going with MS65 all the way.

I love gambling like this on pictures. So far I'm 1/0 today.

coinguy1

Why not a 66?

While it's impossible to consistently grade accurately from images, I see nothing in these images that necessarily makes the coin less than a 66.

mgoodm3

the scruffy looking area on the gown above the 9 kinda makes me think 65.

LeeG

Nice Coin! Looks like something going on above the AMER in America? May just be the lighting?? Lee

KollectorKing

I too wanna say 66, but someone beat me to it

Woodwind

I'm going with MS 66 too. Slightly better strike and fewer contact marks than my lone MS-65 Walker.

cohodk

I thought this was a lock 65 maybe a 66 also. Well, NGC gave it a 62. I couldnt believe it either. There is not a tick on this coin and the luster is good but not exploding. The only thing I could reason is the slightly weak strike. I may give it a quick dip to remove the reverse toning and try it again.

ziggy29

<< <i>I thought this was a lock 65 maybe a 66 also. Well, NGC gave it a 62. I couldnt believe it either. There is not a tick on this coin and the luster is good but not exploding. The only thing I could reason is the slightly weak strike. I may give it a quick dip to remove the reverse toning and try it again. >>

Wow. I was going to say 65 or 66 surfaces but perhaps 64 because of strike. But 62? If this coin is as it appears, that's awfully harsh. And so much for Kool-Aid induced claims tha NGC is too loose...

coinguy1

<< <i>I thought this was a lock 65 maybe a 66 also. Well, NGC gave it a 62. I couldnt believe it either. There is not a tick on this coin and the luster is good but not exploding. The only thing I could reason is the slightly weak strike. >>

Cohodk, there is no way that coin received an MS62 grade due to its strike.

If the surfaces are as clean as they appear to be, my guess is that there is some "stacking friction" and/or light hairlines (perhaps from a gentle wiping) which are not apparent in the images. There is some cloudiness/haziness in the right obverse field - take a close look there.

I will give NGC the benefit of the doubt since they've seen it, and chalk this up as yet another great example of how we can't grade/see everything we need to from images.

cohodk

Thanks Mark. I'm going to crack it, since the plastic is worthless as a 62 anyway, and try to get some pics of it raw. Really I dont see any problems with this coin.

ChuckC

the 2 is close to the 4, 5 and 6 on a number pad. My prediction: poor quality control...

Mostly likely, the grader went for the 5 key and hit 2. Then, with the hundreds of coins passing through the grader's hands that day (which I suspect was a Friday), there may not have been time to check the day's work or yours was overlooked even upon a double check due to the high volume and the grader's preoccupied mind (night club later that night). Just my theory, of course, I do not know NGC's process for grading, so I may be way off!

coinguy1

ChuckC, more than one grader would have seen and graded the coin, as would a subsequent verifier/quality control person.

ChuckC

that leaves me with a big then

kieferscoins

I'm glad I chose 64 instead of 66

Cameron Kiefer

robertpr

I would say that coin would be a 66 except that I think there's friction on the head and breast of Miss Liberty (and maybe on the eagle's beak, but that may be image compression.)

What sucks is that it's a great coin, with none of the bagginess you usually see on the leg/skirt!

[edit] OK now that I've read the thread I see it's a 62...well, I told you I saw friction.[edit]

100proof1957

66