PCGS grading

Taikonaut

I saw this $20 piece on the teletrade auction site that was giveme MS64

http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=2030&lot=1926

The reverse may qualify at MS64 but the obverse had some serious bagging and scratches all over it looks more MS60 to MS61,
have to admit most MS63 that was listed there are overall in better condition and more attractive than this.

DNADave

Linkified


Edited to add: Buy the coin, not the holder.

Koinlink

That front end really is banged up!

Taikonaut

I agree and you would think something as obvious as that is not even open to any doubt that its not an MS64 but for PCGS grader to give it such a grade its brings the whole reputation into disrepute and difficult to realise what is a proper grading system.

nwcs

I know you hate PCGS grading so in any case I can see a 3 for this coin. Luster is superb and the hits may not be as severe appearing in person and gold is always graded with a little more leniency than other coins. Besides, grading from a photo is barely above sight unseen.

roadrunner

The intensity of the luster plays a strong role in that last 1/3 of a point. I see the coin as a 63+ or a 64- so the assigned grade is reasonable. $20 LIb gold comes with many hits in the focal areas and that's the way they are graded. I remember my trip in 1982 to view some of the Eliasberg $20 gold coins. I figured they were MS64+ to MS65+, the nicer ones that is. AFter all, they had some hits on the face and scuffs/grazes in the fields. Imagine my surprise when they were bringing $10,000 and up....superb/ultra gem territory....and at that time no grading service existed. They were bringing 67 money (no grade of 66 existed yet in the vernacular).
I thought everyone was insane. When I ran into these same coins 5-10 years later in 66-67 holders I realized that my standards were a little too tuff.

Even MS65 $20 Libs have some noticeable facial hits, much more than would be allowed on a Morgan or Barber half for example.
Just the way it is. Technically we can call this MS62 or MS63, then all the MS65's would become 64's and 63's, and all the Eliasberg gems would fall to the 65 level....just as I had graded them 23 years ago.
It's just semantics. Prices ultimately determine what the grade is.

roadrunner

FatMan

If you believe that coin is a MS60-MS61, I am very interested in buying coins from you.

Taikonaut

The obverse do look like a candidate for MS60 to MS61, the reverse maybe an MS64, there is cartwheel lustre on both side but again here it looks like its been lightly cleaned or dipped, even so because of the amount of bagging and scratches on the obverse no amount of lustre can make this MS64. Compare this coin to the PCGS MS63 listed its not near as good.

CoinResource

Looks 61-62 MAX

Russ

<< <i>it looks more MS60 to MS61 >>



An MS60 or MS61 gold is a doggy coin. The one in that auction is not a doggy coin. You can't grade 19th century gold by the same standard as 20th century silver, which is what you are doing.

Russ, NCNE

BillJones

The coin is an easy MS-63. MS-64 is pushing it, but in today's market, it could be called "a weak 4."

streeter

strikes me as 62 ....tops.

Myqqy

for PCGS grader to give it such a grade its brings the whole reputation into disrepute and difficult to realise what is a proper grading system.

I think that you are going overboard by trying to grade a coin by a teletrade picture, and then saying that it brings "the whole reputation" of pcgs into question. And I think you are being too tough on this coin in particular...

nwcs

Of course, the real question still is whether coin is graded consistent with PCGS's standards -- not anyone else's standards.