To me, a true AU58 is a coin that, if somebody were to place it alongside several MS62, MS63, and MS64 coins of the same series and then cover up all of the grades, I would have a hard time picking out which coin is the AU58 without the benefit of a magnifier.
My current coin collecting interests are: (1) British coins 1838-1970 in XF-AU-UNC, (2) silver type coins in XF-AU with that classic medium gray coloration and exceptional eye appeal.
@Numiven said: " Just lacks full luster with slight rub on high poins, but I have seen many 61,62 with many dings: "
That's an attractive coin you've posted. In my experience, the $3 gold series is often slightly over graded due to the value of the coins. Adjectives often add to the problem. For example "a trace of wear" and "slight wear" do not conjure up the same amount of luster loss that "a trace of wear" and "very slight wear" do for me. LOL, in the end it is all just words; yet slight wear is an AU-55 to me.
I'll agree with the rest of your post. MS-61 and MS-62 coins are generally marked up. IMO, if your coin were less circulated, it should have made MS-62 at the least.
@BarberFanatic said: "To me, a true AU58 is a coin that, if somebody were to place it alongside several MS62, MS63, and MS64 coins of the same series and then cover up all of the grades, I would have a hard time picking out which coin is the AU58 without the benefit of a magnifier."
I find that very hard to believe but only you know your personal limits. Once a student decides that a coin is Uncirculated, there is a fairly large and naked-eye discernable difference between the three grades you listed. Much of it is due to the number and location of marks, as eye-appeal is close and so is the luster if the coin is original and not cleaned. A bigger problem for a grader is to decide how much actual loss of luster from friction wear can be ignored to keep a coin in the Uncirculated range. The OP's coin had too much.
First. Someone had to post on this thread to bring it back from the dead! It was not me.
Second. When I looked it was very near the top of the new posts so I "assumed" it was new. I thought it very funny when JACM called me out as I've made the same mistake many times in the past.
Third. Dumb me never looks at when a thread started and I find it very strange that there was only one or one and a half pages of discussion on this IMPORTANT subject for it to be so old.
Forth. This is a very important aspect of coin grading. A thread like this should be eternally open for the new members.
Fifth. IMHO, there was some very wacky opinions expressed. They may be only wacky to me though as I'm an old guy who may have been in too many coin grading seminars over the years. In other words, Perhaps my experience is "NOT real world."
Sixth. I mostly "glicked" (whatever that means) each one separately as I didn't have the time to "glick" them all at once.
Seventh. I expected this threat would "take-off" with a large number of posters and opinions that we all could discuss. I like to learn new things by changing my opinion when it is warranted. I'm sorry it did not.
PS I'm still LOL at this: "You're a peach! You are undressing posters that are long since banned in a six old thread. You will win those debates."
@hchcoin said:
I was hoping @llafoe was back. He was one of my favorite posters and had some of the best one liners on the forum. Hope all is well with him.
Sixth. I mostly "glicked" (whatever that means) each one separately as I didn't have the time to "glick" them all at once.
Seventh. I expected this threat would "take-off" with a large number of posters and opinions that we all could discuss. I like to learn new things by changing my opinion when it is warranted. I'm sorry it did not.
PS I'm still LOL at this: "You're a peach! You are undressing posters that are long since banned in a six old thread. You will win those debates."
PPS I like debating - especially when I win.
to glick is to post 10 times more often than necessary , if you look at page one of the forum and your name is the last poster on a half dozen threads or your icon is pictured as the thread starter of a half dozen threads you are glicking.
By posting twice in a row in this thread i might be glicking a tad also.
Comments
Just lacks full luster with slight rub on high poins, but I have seen many 61,62 with many dings:
Numismatics & Photography
rv@ravenumismatics.com
Instagram.com/coin2photo
An AU58 coin is one that did it's job by circulating in commerce for a very brief period of time.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
To me, a true AU58 is a coin that, if somebody were to place it alongside several MS62, MS63, and MS64 coins of the same series and then cover up all of the grades, I would have a hard time picking out which coin is the AU58 without the benefit of a magnifier.
As per ANA grading standards
@Numiven said: " Just lacks full luster with slight rub on high poins, but I have seen many 61,62 with many dings:
"
That's an attractive coin you've posted. In my experience, the $3 gold series is often slightly over graded due to the value of the coins. Adjectives often add to the problem. For example "a trace of wear" and "slight wear" do not conjure up the same amount of luster loss that "a trace of wear" and "very slight wear" do for me. LOL, in the end it is all just words; yet slight wear is an AU-55 to me.
I'll agree with the rest of your post. MS-61 and MS-62 coins are generally marked up. IMO, if your coin were less circulated, it should have made MS-62 at the least.
@BarberFanatic said: "To me, a true AU58 is a coin that, if somebody were to place it alongside several MS62, MS63, and MS64 coins of the same series and then cover up all of the grades, I would have a hard time picking out which coin is the AU58 without the benefit of a magnifier."
I find that very hard to believe but only you know your personal limits. Once a student decides that a coin is Uncirculated, there is a fairly large and naked-eye discernable difference between the three grades you listed. Much of it is due to the number and location of marks, as eye-appeal is close and so is the luster if the coin is original and not cleaned. A bigger problem for a grader is to decide how much actual loss of luster from friction wear can be ignored to keep a coin in the Uncirculated range. The OP's coin had too much.
I noticed that , plus he could have undressed them all in one post , but he chose to glick them separately .
OP isn't banned but hasn't been by in a long time methinks.
The first grade tier below UNC. A coin that has circulation wear not cabinet nor flip friction nor stacking / roll friction. Actual wear...
@bronco2078
First. Someone had to post on this thread to bring it back from the dead! It was not me.
Second. When I looked it was very near the top of the new posts so I "assumed" it was new. I thought it very funny when JACM called me out as I've made the same mistake many times in the past.
Third. Dumb me never looks at when a thread started and I find it very strange that there was only one or one and a half pages of discussion on this IMPORTANT subject for it to be so old.
Forth. This is a very important aspect of coin grading. A thread like this should be eternally open for the new members.
Fifth. IMHO, there was some very wacky opinions expressed. They may be only wacky to me though as I'm an old guy who may have been in too many coin grading seminars over the years. In other words, Perhaps my experience is "NOT real world."
Sixth. I mostly "glicked" (whatever that means) each one separately as I didn't have the time to "glick" them all at once.
Seventh. I expected this threat would "take-off" with a large number of posters and opinions that we all could discuss. I like to learn new things by changing my opinion when it is warranted. I'm sorry it did not.
PS I'm still LOL at this: "You're a peach! You are undressing posters that are long since banned in a six old thread. You will win those debates."
PPS I like debating - especially when I win.
@mercurydimeguy said: "The first grade tier below UNC. A coin that has circulation wear not cabinet nor flip friction. Actual wear..."
Unfortunately, in my experience very, very, very many folks who are involved with coins cannot tell the difference between:
Let's add improper cleaning and altered surfaces too.
PS IMHO "flip friction" is a myth and "cabinet friction" is an euphemism for friction wear (loss of luster on the high points of the relief.
i agree. eye appeal works wonders
I was hoping @llafoe was back. He was one of my favorite posters and had some of the best one liners on the forum. Hope all is well with him.
I was thinking the same thing
to glick is to post 10 times more often than necessary , if you look at page one of the forum and your name is the last poster on a half dozen threads or your icon is pictured as the thread starter of a half dozen threads you are glicking.
By posting twice in a row in this thread i might be glicking a tad also.
@bronco2078
Thank you! I'm more accustomed to another forum that won't let me add new quotes in an edit. Anyway, by your definition, I'm a prolific "glicker."