MS62?????

ddbird

Can anyone help me figure out why this is only in a PCGS 62 holder. Its a new slab...the cheeck is clear. I have seen 65s that are worse. The only thing I can think of is a semi weak strike, but would they dock that many points. Reverse is not pictured, but actually clearer than the obverse. Any ideas?

lordmarcovan

Maybe it got downgraded 'cause of the big red X?

Ah- second time's the charm. It's showing now.

lordmarcovan

You're right- while I've not seen any 65's that are worse, I've seen some that looked about the same as that... and plenty of 64's that looked worse than that...

airplanenut

How's the lustre... and reverse?

ddbird

Luster is Sweet...reverse is just as clean. Im just too lazy to photograph it

D

It almost looked cleaned at first glance .

-Daniel

itsnotjustme

I'd want to see the coin in hand and the reverse. From that photo, the luster looks more like a sheen....that could downgrade it. Although I don't know the mint mark or strike characteristics for that date/MM, the strike is soft over the ear.

BigGreek

I've gotten back some pretty tight grades recently. I can't explain it.
Maybe the graders were under some sort of pressure to produce so
they said w.t.f. just grade 'em low and throw them out the door.

Did you sumbit it?

ddbird

Nope...I dont remeber how I acquired it actually. Its an 87P and a weak strike for the date...but still. Its a nice looking coin, and should be an easy 63+/64

SeattleSlammer

whiskey shots in the grading room

tsacch

too many fatty's at lunch time?

Myqqy

Perhaps so the owner of the coin would get pissed at the injustice and send it back for a regrade, thereby giving the grading company more money?