Do you ever get your confidence in your ability to grade coins shaken?
Justhavingfun
Posts: 835 ✭
Do you ever lose confidence in your ability to grade coins?
Usually, I’m very self-assured about grading, and rely on my own eye more than the certificate. But every so often something happens that shakes me up, and that happened last night.
I had just returned from the US to Thailand. I was lying in bed -- which I had set up to have great lighting for coins. I was browsing through a handful of coins I had pulled out of a safe in the states and brought over the ocean. As I often do -- to train my eye -- I took one coin, covered the cert, and graded it.
** “Nice 1958 Franklin Half” I said to myself, “but two big dings on the cheek, a nick on the chin, a fouth on the shoulder, and chatter in the field.” Flipping it over, I saw it was “better than the obverse, but not superb, and clearly a weak strike. No chance for full-bell lines.” So I said to myself: “MS64 no bell lines.”
I flipped the coin over and checked the cert. Wrong it was not MS 64 no bell lines but PCGS MS66 Full Bell Lines.
** So I picked up the next coin and said to myself: “Here’s a beautiful 1885 Seated Lib Quarter, proof. The field is flawless. Lady Liberty shows slightly weak hair but no signs of rub on either hand, the leg, the breasts, or the upper right tip of the shield [the spots where wear appears first]. No nicks or dings. Unattractive toning with a dark splotch between 7 and 8.”
I flip it over, and the coin looks perfecto on the reverse too. “Proof 66 or 67, probably 66 because of the toning,” I say to myself.
Wrong again. Not Proof 66 or 67 but PCGS Proof 62! “Proof 62? Impossible. So I checked the coin again: Not a stinking nick, ding, or scratch anywhere. No rub. What’s going on here?” Beats me.
** Then I picked up a 1901-S Gold Eagle. It was clearly not circulated -- no wear, but the fields were filled with chatter, dings, nicks, and scuff marks. The back was better but no prize package. “I’ve seen hundreds of coins like this,” I said to myself, thinking especially of the US-Philippine series, where I’ve had to buy rolls of pesos and half-centavos like these to complete bigger deals. Uncirculated but covered with scuffs, nicks, and dings. And the coins always come AU 58 to MS 62.
So, I said to myself: “anywhere from AU 58 to a charitable MS62.”
Wrong Not AU58 to MS62 but NGC MS64.
“Holy Moley!” I said to myself. “I’m really going in reverse tonight. Let me see if I can tighten this up.”
** So I picked up the next coin, a lovely 1954-S Washington Quarter, with beautiful toning front and back. It was light-years ahead of the Franklin Half, but clearly missed MS67, so I said to myself: “MS 66" -- and held my breath as I checked the cert. I was right! PCGS 66. Ah, I was back on track.
** The next coin was a 1854 $1 gold coin. Oh, what a lovely coin that is. Well struck front and back. Pristine fields. No obvious, nicks, dings, or scratches. No scuffs. No chatter in the fields. And wow! What interesting die clashes! There was a clear up-side-down secondary image of Lady Liberty on the reverse, and elements of the reverse sticking out in a fascinating manner from her head on the obverse.
“This is a killer coin,” I said to myself. It has to be MS 66, with a shot at 67.”
Killer coin? Nope. PCGS graded it MS62.
“MS 62? Impossible. This is clearly a gem,” so I went over it again, and again, no chance in my mind but that it was a gem.
By now, you can tell I was beginning to get shaken in my ability to tell up from down.
** I then undergraded two NGC Double Eagles by 2 points; overgraded a PCGS $5 Indian by one point, and undergraded a beautifully toned NGC-slabbed Mercury dime by a point.
That doesn’t usually happen to me like that. I’m usually right there on the spot or very close to it. But here I was missing the grade by 2 points, even 4. And as I woke up this morning and rechecked the coins, I still can’t see their grades.
So my question to you is: “Has something like this ever happened to you to shake up your confidence in grading coins?”
Enjoy!
Just Having Fun
Usually, I’m very self-assured about grading, and rely on my own eye more than the certificate. But every so often something happens that shakes me up, and that happened last night.
I had just returned from the US to Thailand. I was lying in bed -- which I had set up to have great lighting for coins. I was browsing through a handful of coins I had pulled out of a safe in the states and brought over the ocean. As I often do -- to train my eye -- I took one coin, covered the cert, and graded it.
** “Nice 1958 Franklin Half” I said to myself, “but two big dings on the cheek, a nick on the chin, a fouth on the shoulder, and chatter in the field.” Flipping it over, I saw it was “better than the obverse, but not superb, and clearly a weak strike. No chance for full-bell lines.” So I said to myself: “MS64 no bell lines.”
I flipped the coin over and checked the cert. Wrong it was not MS 64 no bell lines but PCGS MS66 Full Bell Lines.
** So I picked up the next coin and said to myself: “Here’s a beautiful 1885 Seated Lib Quarter, proof. The field is flawless. Lady Liberty shows slightly weak hair but no signs of rub on either hand, the leg, the breasts, or the upper right tip of the shield [the spots where wear appears first]. No nicks or dings. Unattractive toning with a dark splotch between 7 and 8.”
I flip it over, and the coin looks perfecto on the reverse too. “Proof 66 or 67, probably 66 because of the toning,” I say to myself.
Wrong again. Not Proof 66 or 67 but PCGS Proof 62! “Proof 62? Impossible. So I checked the coin again: Not a stinking nick, ding, or scratch anywhere. No rub. What’s going on here?” Beats me.
** Then I picked up a 1901-S Gold Eagle. It was clearly not circulated -- no wear, but the fields were filled with chatter, dings, nicks, and scuff marks. The back was better but no prize package. “I’ve seen hundreds of coins like this,” I said to myself, thinking especially of the US-Philippine series, where I’ve had to buy rolls of pesos and half-centavos like these to complete bigger deals. Uncirculated but covered with scuffs, nicks, and dings. And the coins always come AU 58 to MS 62.
So, I said to myself: “anywhere from AU 58 to a charitable MS62.”
Wrong Not AU58 to MS62 but NGC MS64.
“Holy Moley!” I said to myself. “I’m really going in reverse tonight. Let me see if I can tighten this up.”
** So I picked up the next coin, a lovely 1954-S Washington Quarter, with beautiful toning front and back. It was light-years ahead of the Franklin Half, but clearly missed MS67, so I said to myself: “MS 66" -- and held my breath as I checked the cert. I was right! PCGS 66. Ah, I was back on track.
** The next coin was a 1854 $1 gold coin. Oh, what a lovely coin that is. Well struck front and back. Pristine fields. No obvious, nicks, dings, or scratches. No scuffs. No chatter in the fields. And wow! What interesting die clashes! There was a clear up-side-down secondary image of Lady Liberty on the reverse, and elements of the reverse sticking out in a fascinating manner from her head on the obverse.
“This is a killer coin,” I said to myself. It has to be MS 66, with a shot at 67.”
Killer coin? Nope. PCGS graded it MS62.
“MS 62? Impossible. This is clearly a gem,” so I went over it again, and again, no chance in my mind but that it was a gem.
By now, you can tell I was beginning to get shaken in my ability to tell up from down.
** I then undergraded two NGC Double Eagles by 2 points; overgraded a PCGS $5 Indian by one point, and undergraded a beautifully toned NGC-slabbed Mercury dime by a point.
That doesn’t usually happen to me like that. I’m usually right there on the spot or very close to it. But here I was missing the grade by 2 points, even 4. And as I woke up this morning and rechecked the coins, I still can’t see their grades.
So my question to you is: “Has something like this ever happened to you to shake up your confidence in grading coins?”
Enjoy!
Just Having Fun
Jefferson nickels, Standing Libs, and US-Philippines rock
0
Comments
<< <i>“Has something like this ever happened to you to shake up your confidence in grading coins?” >>
No! But sometimes I do 'shake my head'.
All your roosies are clearly overgraded -- send them all to me!!!!
rainbowroosie April 1, 2003
2. 1885 SL 25c - If the toning is the least bit 'skanky' , don't expect much better than a 64.....you sure there are no hairlines?
3. Gold is tough....but I guarantee that from recently looking at a lot of $10 & $20 Libs that what were 62/63s of 10 years ago have received a 1 pt. bump IMHO (at least on the common dates). I say this because I had a collection of rare date gold that I sold mainly because it was well nigh to find better than 62/63s.....no more, it seems.
4. No hidden hairlines on that 1854 $1?
.....and on and on.......maybe the graders had dined on chili cheese burritos (instead of a nice pad thai dish
PS. That entire Philippine collection is probably overgraded 5-10 points.....I'll give you 20% over melt.....deal?
Brian
I looked at about 1,000 Mercury Dimes at Long Beach a couple of weeks back...my head was shaking like a bobbly dog head on a car dashboard. And then I realized, it's not me. I'm looking at the evolution of grading over a 5-8 year period...meaning, I looked at coins ranging from PCGS Rattle Holders all the way through coins graded 2 weeks ago. During this time frame coin grading has evolved, or matured if you would, and this is what some (and myself once) would refer to as changing grading standards.
The best way, I've come to the conclusion, to honestly assess what your set would grade at any given point in time is to send in the set as a whole for regrading. I've completed my Merc set and just have 4 upgrades to go. Once I get these coins over the coming couple of months, I will send in my entire set for regrading and then pedigreeing. This way, I'll have all sequential cert #'s and a grading opinion for how the entire set graded on a specific date in time. This should eliminate looking at one of my 64FB dimes and saying to yourself, "gee, it looks just like the 8 66FB's I just looked at".
I'd like to think it's them not me, but when I have a run like that, it shakes me me up.
Dear Man of Coins:
First, you have one heck of a Washington Quarter Set. I collect 'em too, so I know how hard they are. You've done a wonderful job on them.
Second, the gold is out of my area of expertise. I bought all the gold coins raw, from Littleton and Bowers, a long, long time ago, and forgot about them. A few years ago, I went into my vault and found them lying there.
With the exception of the 1854 $1 gold coin, I said they were junk and gave them to Warren Mills of Rare Coins of New Hampshire to dump for me. He said: "Let me slab a few of these coins for you." I didn't understand why, but he has a lot of credibility with me, so I gave him the go ahead. I remember now being stunned back then by the grades the eagles and double eagles got. Coins that clearly deserved AU58 slabbing at 62 and 64. He then dumped the worst of them for me, and left me with these -- which were the best of a sorry lot.
Obviously Warren knew something about grading gold coins that I didn't. Maybe the standards are lower because gold is such a soft metal. But by silver coin standards, these MS 64's and 65's are clearly MS62s and 63s at best.
Enjoy!
Just Having Fun
lol! I was sure shaking my head too, last night.
The Ben Franklin halve: It's a nice looking original coin. Never been played with. The two dings on the check are not huge, but they're immediately accessible to the naked eye from any angle. Ditto for the scuffing in the field. The nick on the chin -- you have to hold it right to see it with the nekid eye, but once you spot it, it's always there for you. And the chatter on the chest is easily visible too.
But it was the full band lines that really threw me. They're so weak you have to hold the coin at a certain angle even to see them and then there's no way they're full. To put the bell lines into perspective, if I got a Jefferson nickel with steps comparable to these, I'd have said: "Oh, a nice four stepper. "
The 1885 Seated Liberty Quarter. No hairlines visible to the naked eye; at least to my naked eyes. Under a 16-powered loupe, yes, some light hairlines. I've seen proof 64's, 65's, and even 66's with more (and more visible) hairlines. You say because of the toning to expect no more than a Proof 64. And I could have understood that. But Proof 62? A 62 should show a lot of nicks, dings, and chatter. I'm looking at the coin and it simply doesn't show that at all.
And the $1 gold coin is a beaut. I just took out my 16-powered loupe again, and when over it with the proverbial fine-toothed comb, and none of those hairlines. This is a beautiful coin. That off-set head of Lady liberty on the reverse is awesome.
Turning to the US-Philippines, I know you were kidding, but you're not entirely wrong about that. When I started slabbing them, about 6 or 7 years ago, I thought their standards were looser than for the comparable US coins. About half a point higher on the average.
I figured maybe that was their way of encouraging me to give traction to the series. Or maybe because back then the US-Philippines were so cheap, the difference in value between MS63 and 64 was too little to worry about. But for the last 3 or 4 years, as prices on the US Philippines began to rise, I think the grading evened out to par with comparable US coins.
Thanks for your thoughtful input. Much appreciated.
Just Having Fun
Gosh, I was all set to send you my entire Roosie collection, when Jilaporn knocked at the door and said "Geen chao tawn chow" -- which means: "Come eat your breakfast." So, unfortunately, I didn't have time to send them.
Bye for now, guys. After breakfast, I go to work. I'll try to pick up the threads after dinner, much later tonight.
Warm regards,
Just Having Fun
Damn, I'll buy you breakfast, lunch, dinner, and a bottle of wine if you'll send them!!!!
rainbowroosie April 1, 2003
roadrunner
How would Jilaporn say, "Sir, I've just shipped those loosely graded Filipinas to Mr. Mac!" ??
My guess is that PCGS would now gauge the Filipinas silver against the criteria for the SLQ, at least for the top-end grades; true?
I know they do for the Swiss Standing Helvetia, and on those we seldom disagree...
Me too. There was one 20th century coin that I missed so badly (58 vs 64) that I spent the next week convinced I was hopeless. Of course, I probably am hopeless...
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
To really test the theory, crack the 62's and resubmit and see what you get. If they come back as
65's or 66's, then you have a moral victory and a $$ jump. If not, then you go for the presidential
review to get an explanation.
<< <i>Do you ever get your confidence in your ability to grade coins shaken? >>
Uhm, yes, yes I do! It's funny you should ask JHF, I don't understand the MS61 grade on this eBay auction (not mine, don't know who it is) US-Phil 1903-S Peso NGC MS61. I'm definitely still learning to grade, learning the US-Philippine series overall, and well, basically learning as much as I can. I thought I was getting close to grading MS60+ coins within 2 grades, but I have no idea why this coin is only 61. It looks a lot nicer to me, 63 at least, the scratches don't seem that bad, are they? or is this a gift AU-58? totally dipped out? The strike on this coin looks killer to me, I'm so confused. If *anyone* (hint hint JHF
Need more $$$ for coins?
My confidence in grading coins in the series I collect is and has been good for a very long time. Where I go beserk is when the TGP services are all over the place in their grades of the SAME coin.
I will give some examples, and I'm sure we have all experienced this at one time or another. So don't fret that your late night grading of coins you own may vary from the posted grade on the coin. It can and will change, and might even end up being what you always thought it should be.
I bought several raw coins out of the Queller Sale of halves, in October 2002. All were originally sent to PCGS, and one deverves mention.
The 1904-S, a key in the Barbers, was an original toned beauty, and John Hugon and I bid fiercely. I won with a bid of about $6000. I had noted in the catalog that the coin was a pq 62/63, only one significant hit on the obverse face, great reverse strike, and even lusterous toning. I had dreams that on a good day, it might 64.
All the raw Queller coins went in on one submission, and the 04-S came back in an AU 58 holder. Ridiculous you say, but wait. Several of the beautiful bust halves no graded, and I was livid.
Off to NGC. They put the bust halves in 64 and 65 holders where they belonged, but one of the 64's was resubmitted for a 65 upgrade. It got it on the first try. 2 of the lower grade halves never did grade at either service.
Back to the 04-S. NGC graded it 61. Disappointed but not through. Broke it out and resubmitted to PCGS( about 1 year later). New grade-----MS 63. Sold for just shy of 64 money, as there are too many collectors and just a few MS coins.
Moral--Grading between AU 58 and MS 63 is very subjective. Highly trained eyes will see these grades differently on many occasions, especially if old toning is involved. Blast white coins will vary less, in my experience.
Thank you, Mercury Dime Guy: Yes, the grading has evolved (loosened) over the years, but I'm not blaming the grading services for what happened. The problem is with me; my eye that's failed me.
I can't believe PCGS would grade a beautiful one-dollar gold coin (with fascinating die clashes, front and back) as MS 62 if it was really 65 or 66 as I see it. They're too good for a stupid mistake like that. What's frustrating me -- and shaking my confidence in my ability to grade -- is that I can't imagine how they got that dime down to MS62. What did they see that I didn't? I looked at it with my naked eye. With a high-powered loupe. Rotated it this way and that to see if I could find some hidden flaws. Checked it under 4 different types of lighting. And I still see the little bugger as a gem.
And conversely, that Benjamin Franklin Half: a nice looking coin but to me it had the dings and nicks of a 64. But they graded it 66. And the full bell lines? Again, if the bell lines are as weak as they appear to me, they're too smart to give that full bell lines designation. So I am missing something: but what? Very frustrating to me.
And thank you too Road Runner. When I got your reply, I had only viewed the coin under one type of incandescent lighting. After getting it, I tried a second wattage, flourescent, and natural lighting. That was a useful reminder for me: the incandescent was much better.
Warm regards,
Just Having Fun!
A couple of years ago at FUN I had the opportunity to study a case full of IHC's....complete series minus the 77 all graded MS64 Red. There were at least 8 upgrades to 65 and IMHO one should have been in a 66 holder. All were in PCGS slabs and proof that time changes what they call a 65. At least 9 coins were undergraded and deserved higher grades regardless of when they were graded. The owner also agreed with me on every coin.
Ditto for you, Mr. Eureka. But you know that 58 to 64 can be tricky. On two occasions, I've cracked out AU58s and resubmitted then, to get MS64s. Once I thought the PCGS was nuts and was sure I'd get at least a 62 or 63 the next time. And that time, the original graders were nuts and the coin came back 64.
The other time, I wasn't so sure. I thought it was a weak strike not wear, but just wasn't sure. It was a US Philippine coin of a good date. So I sent it back in (cracked out) and it landed back home in a 64 holder. Two upgrades of 6 points!
And to the contrary, I have some low-grade uncs that I really, really think belong in AU 58 holders. I don't crack 'em out, but you know ... when I sell them, I say I think it's an overgrade. No skin off my back and life is too short to go around knowingly screwing people.
Hello Mr. Trade Dollar Nut. Did Jimmy Halperin get a high or a low score?
And thanks for the suggestion Rob Getty. If the coin and I were in the states, I'd take your suggestion immediately. As it is, I think I might just make a game of this. Take five or ten coins, bring 'em back to the states and have 'em cracked out. Save the labels, and send the coins in to NGC, just for the fun of it. Then, get the NGC slabs back and send them to PCGS. See what I get. That should be fun.
Excellent idea! Thank you!
Hello Wekar. Last night I did go to the eBay/numismatics/Philippine site and didn't find the coin. Now I see I could have just clicked on the link. I'll do that now and see if I can get there that way.
Warm regards from Bangkok,
Just Having Fun
To me, a classic 61.
But did you see the price it brought? $207. Wow. These US Philippines are really on the move.
Best wishes,
Just Having Fun
World Series of Grading Results
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I try to grade my coins independently as well and compare my grades to the certified scores. Most of the time, I am dead on with PCGS. On occassion, I am much harder than PCGS (especially on surface preservation). I believe PCGS will sometimes be a little easy on surface preservation on Morgans if the coin has a great strike or great luster.
I think it is great that you routinely check yourself. It is a good thing.
Yes, I have up close bi-focals too. Reading/numismatics. Very helpful.
Hello MGoodM: I find the scans can help, but without looking intently at the coin, I find the scans often fool me.
So for me, there's nothing like looking at the actual coin because when I tilt it this way and that, I see things that a heads-on view misses. That's why I like to stare at a coin to get the general feel for it and then scan it more closely with the loupe to get a better feel for the details (strike), to spot hidden flaws, and most of all, spot unattributed varieties, most often repunched dates. In the US Philippine centavo series, when I scanned a commonplace 1908-S centavo in MS64 brown, I found it was the rare and famous "Horned S" variety. And when I recently bought an up-grade proof shield nickel and examined it with a loupe, I found it was a clear double-die on the obverse. Not machine doubling either.
Nice to meet you Irish Mike, and thanks for the input. The stuff on Franklin's chin and jacket wasn't too distracting but the dings on the cheek and the scuffing in the field were, at least to me. But what's your experience with the Bell Lines? At one time I started to collect the Franklin halves in full bell lines. But I got discouraged when I'd buy a "Full Bell Line" coin and receive something that -- in my opinion -- didn't even remotely resemble Full Bell Lines. That's what led me to stop collecting them. I sold off most of my collection three or four years ago. This Ben Franklin had been separated from my main Franklin collection and didn't get sold with the rest.
And Mr. Trade Dollar Nut: my congratulations to Halperin. I followed your link and his achievement was awesome!
Best wishes,
Just Having Fun