Can a Walker be "gem" grade with a hit on the sun?

39Special

Just curious if a significant contact mark on the sun on the obverse of a walking liberty half automatically precludes a gem grade, even if the rest of the coin is outstanding. Thoughts anyone?

DRUNNER

I would not know from any empirical data, but that is certainly the location (as well as the field on the right side and the leg/breast) that I've been told is the most critical. When I try to cherrypick a 65+ I alwasy look at the sun first . . .no matter how wrong I may be. I've just learned that from numismatists far wiser than I.

Drunner

Walkerguy21D

I agree with Drunner, that is a prime focal area on a walker, and SHOULD preclude it from a Gem status grade. However, I'm sure there are examples in 65 holders from major TPGs floating around in the market place.

coinguy1

It depends upon your definition or example of "significant". I have seen many Walkers graded MS66 that had an obvious mark or marks on the sun, however.

Julian

<< <i>It depends upon your definition or example of "significant". I have seen many Walkers graded MS66 that had an obvious mark or marks on the sun, however. >>

MrEureka

It depends upon your definition or example of "significant".

It also depends on how nice the rest of the coin is.

WTCG

<< <i>It depends upon your definition or example of "significant". I have seen many Walkers graded MS66 that had an obvious mark or marks on the sun, however. >>



That's about right.

lordmarcovan

<< <i>It depends upon your definition or example of "significant" >>

I suppose it also can depend on your definition of "Gem". I guess most people automatically associate the term "Gem" with coins grading 65 and up, but for some people it's all about the luster. If a coin has screaming cartwheel luster, it could be called "gemmy" in spite of some marks or hits in focal areas, yes? How etched in stone is the definition of "Gem"?

ricko

There are no definitions of grades... only guidelines. Grades are not standards. Cheers, RickO

PerryHall

Can we get a pic of the coin in question? One persons tic mark is another persons significant hit.

Walkerguy21D

The OP asked us for our thoughts with a hypothetical statement of 'significant contact mark' - I visualized what most experienced and rational dealers and collectors would deem as 'significant' if they had no vested interest in the coin (i.e. they aren't the ones buying or selling), something more substantial than a tic mark, but less blatant than a gouge all the way across the sun. Both PCGS Grading Guide and Jim Halperin's book on grading show the sun on a walker is equivalent in importance as the cheek on a Morgan dollar. I stand by my original post. I personally would not pay gem money for a walker, raw or otherwise, with this flaw, regardless of the other positive attributes of the coin. But this is merely one man's personal opinion based on his perception of a hypothetical situation

AU58WALKERS

<< <i>The OP asked us for our thoughts with a hypothetical statement of 'significant contact mark' - I visualized what most experienced and rational dealers and collectors would deem as 'significant' if they had no vested interest in the coin (i.e. they aren't the ones buying or selling), something more substantial than a tic mark, but less blatant than a gouge all the way across the sun. Both PCGS Grading Guide and Jim Halperin's book on grading show the sun on a walker is equivalent in importance as the cheek on a Morgan dollar. I stand by my original post. I personally would not pay gem money for a walker, raw or otherwise, with this flaw, regardless of the other positive attributes of the coin. But this is merely one man's personal opinion based on his perception of a hypothetical situation >>



i agree

eggbone

<< <i>Can we get a pic of the coin in question? One persons tic mark is another persons significant hit. >>



"Significant" is such a general term that it is essentially worthless without a photo or actual physical description.