1869 Gold $1 opinions...
mercurydimeguy
Posts: 4,625 ✭✭✭✭
Hi gang, thought I'd get your input. Just got this little lady's grade to post (MS61) and the TrueView showed up. I bought her in an OGH NGC 61 holder and she looked wholesome/legit low-end UNC. PCGS agreed...
While I currently have an MS62 in my Mint set, there was something about this new MS61 that I liked, which is why I bought her. I can't place what, just something about the subtlety of the overall look. Am I experiencing the "ownership" bias or do you also like the look of this coin at the assigned grade? I know this is not a top pop monster...
7
Comments
I think that it is a super coin for the MS-61 grade. I've seen a few gold dollars from the era that had mint caused issues which prompted me to pass on them.
I agree it is a very attractive coin!
That's a great looking original coin with an attractive color to it. It looks better than a 61.
I like it, especially for a 61
Latin American Collection
Lots of eye appeal at that grade. Keep them both!
Totally sweet coin there!
My YouTube Channel
awfully nice for a 61, and if the photos show the color correctly, definitely a keeper!
From the picture, it looks like at least a 63.
Nice one.
Phil did an excellent job reproducing the in-hand look of the coin. It's really pleasant and warm. It's eye appeal is nice with just a little color and just a little dirt. I like the look... thanks to all for your feedback.
it's pretty well struck and the bust has good detail. i see why you like it. it's a keeper.
My comment is much like the others. Definitely looks like a high end 61 and I wouldn't think twice if it was in a 62 holder.
I'm with everybody else....looks better than a 61 to me.
@skier07 said: "That's a great looking original coin with an attractive color to it. It looks better than a 61. "
Take a look again. The coin is not original or it should have graded higher. IMO, in a classroom setting the instructor would have made sure everyone saw the friction wear and loss of luster on the high points (Technical AU-58) and then explained that the coin should be commercially graded as MS-61 or MS-62 as I don't believe the value changes much. From the image, I think it deserves an MS-62 so there must be something like continuous HLNS we cannot see.
looks better than a 61
BHNC #203
I agree. A nice-looking "slider."
nice coin, i like
Send it to CAC with a request that it be pre-evaluated as a 58 gold. JA will have a hoot when the two of you discuss it.
Call first. You may be daunted to learn that you'd lose money on the shipping alone, let alone $45.50 in fees.
Surely this cost must be borne if you are interested in justice. History should not be sullied, nor pop reports go unrevised.
Until you are ready to bite the bullet and set things right, "Have fun with your coins"
My grade - slider 62
There were loads and loads of super-grade 1863-1872 (and later) G$1's in the 1984 Brand Estate Sale, the source of the vast majority of coins so graded.
But you and I are a few of the "dinosaurs" around here.
PS Looks like we are in good company.
@ColonelJessup said: "My grade - slider 62"
That's why you make a good instructor. You "see" the entire situation and make it clear.
By original I'm referring to a coin that hasn't been messed with.
Really nice for grade - attractive coin.
Correctly graded as a 61 due to the hairlines. In spite of that it is a surprisingly attractive coin.
The color is particularly nice. But not as nice as this one:
(ex. mercurydimeguy )
It has some hairlines, but it also seems to have natural toning over them. Compared to the bright, shiny, dip-jar-fresh gold coins I'd expect to see in MS61 holders, this one has a very nice look for the grade.
Can a coin that hasn't been messed with have hairlines? Can a uncirculated or proof coin that has been unmolested have hairlines or are those just polish lines? Are hairlines strictly the result of a rub?
What you have asked took over forty minutes to discuss in a class I was in. IMO, 99.9% of the coins that come off the press probably don't. As they mix with other coins hairlining can start. What about the special Proofs we see being handled with gloves and carefully set into trays. A slight misjudgment and a cotton finger can hairline a coin. That said, most proofs start out hairline free; but it is very easy to change that. Remember the photo dust blowers? They had a ball at one end and a brush on the other. I have hairlined a proof SE when the bristles touched the coin as I squeeze the air bulb to blow off dust! I've also dropped a proof SE and had it roll across the floor with absolutely no signs of hairlines or dings using a glass to check it.
The thing about hairlines is they happen. That's why a few random hairlines on a proof for example may only lower the grade. It's the patches of closely spaced hairlines that may get a coin "detailed" for cleaning. Take a look at the ANA Grading Guide for a chart showing one view of how much hairlines affect a grade. The coin in the OP has them, Most Unc coins have them especially 63 and below. The trick is to learn what they look like, the various degrees, and how the TPGS rate them for each grade.
As I said, the OP's coin has them but they are random. Typical of slightly circulated or mishandled coins. Sorry to leave you hanging...bedtime for me.
The reverse die seems strongly lapped and a lot of detail lost within the wreath.
Overall, a nice looking gold coin....very 'mellow'.... at a reasonable price, that is a keeper. Cheers, RickO
Rick, that is exactly how I feel...it doesn't scream at you, a nice warm feel to it (not shiny like a fishing lure). It has a really nice look for a low grade UNC, I've owned many of these and have yet to settle in on one but do like this the best...I can't afford to go to MS65 or better on this coin, but MS64 or lower they all have problems. So my goal has been to find one with the least number of problems, at MS64 or lower, but with an original look
@mercurydimeguy...Well, with this coin, I would say you have achieved your goal..... It is a great picture and if it truly represents the coin, then you have a real keeper there. Cheers, RickO
Thanks for your detailed explanation. I understand exactly what a hairline is.
I'm not trying to be nit picky but I guess I'm confused about what exactly does original mean when referring to coins. My dictionary application has a long definition of original but this definition seems to apply most to coins, "existing at the beginning; first, and new,fresh".
So my question is if a coin is AU from light rub can this coin be original? Is the above coin posted by OP with hairlines original? Perhaps I'm overthinking this but I'm genuinely confused now about what exactly original means.
Sorry if I'm derailing this thread but I'm trying to learn.
@skier07 in context of commonly accepted definition of original, it's a coin that hasn't been altered/processed to look different than its previous state. Like dipped, or tooled, or whizzed, or otherwise altered to have a different appearance (not including Acetone, as that is commonly accepted as OK). Like in any walk of life (e.g. religion, politics, work, hobbies, cars, etc.), there are purists who cling on to something, and extremists on the other side (think of it as a bell curve of how people are wired), while the "fat" part of the bell curve represents the mainstream populous. This hobby needs the "outliers" to keep the mainstream in check, so I for one appreciate everyone's point of view...it helps to validate for me that I'm not living in a bubble/echo chamber of group think. But like any functional human being, once I get someone's opinion, I process it and move on...
Net-net, you will get opinions on what original means that will fall into the fat part of the curve, one standard deviation away, two, and so on...but take all of that with a grain of salt and figure out what you want it to mean to you since what you decide on might put you in a grouping of people who think the same way so you'll always have people to collaborate with.
Collectors like myself pay premiums (sometimes stupid premiums) for coins that have not been altered...and this is where pricing disparities in the market often rear their heads. To a person who doesn't know or appreciate originality, or expects originality as the norm, they might scratch their heads at something that I'm 100% comfortable with.
For me, this Gold $1 is about as original as they come. Hairlined from being in a bag and then a cabinet and then taken in/out of flips 100's of times. The reverse... 90% of 1869 Gold $1 below MS65 are like that...the 1869 relief is usually really hammered out, and the rest of the devices less so. The 1869 $3 is similar in it's makeup. Anyhow, that's not wear, that's handling...and this non-circulation handling limits the grade (that's how one would grade a coin like this, from MS65 down). Circulation wear is different and to me it's really easy to tell. PCGS agrees with me 90% of the time, and that's cause I'm in the same fat part of the bell curve as they are, and sometimes we don't agree on the first look (more often than not we would agree on a second or third look).
Hope this helps... and I'm not flaming anyone here, I'm just breaking down people's opinions in to a bell curve
PS. Disclaimer....to reiterate, I'm in a different segment of the bell curve from others so even though I profess my opinion as gospel, I am self-aware that others think differently and respect their POV
Re: ORIGINALITY
My segment is the top 100 graders in the industry and my over/under is 98% on "original" within two seconds.
Beyond that, a theological discussion
It might make MS-62, from what I can see in the pictures, but there is no way it gets up to MS-63 without a "grade-flation push." I think that there is a slight rub on the high points of the bust.
Eye appeal counts here.
That was the key for me...at a grade level that's affordable for my budget (somehow this thread evolved into grading...which is totally ok). Was looking for input into eye appeal at assigned grade (the latter, practically speaking, has become something that establishes cost these days). Been sticking to 58-62/63 spectrum. Owned a bunch of them and think I will settle on this one cause I like the look
Absolutely AU61
TDN, you just made me think...
Why don't TPG's have AU60, AU61, AU62, AU63, and AU64, since so many of these coins in current MS60-MS64 have rub...would it make an MS61 worth XX more than an AU61?
Or is one person's MS62 another person's AU62 and vice versa?
Just a curious thought...
@liefgold said: "The color is particularly nice. But not as nice as this one."
I'll admit, I don't know how things work here. Everyone is proud of their coins and shows them off.
However, IMO, this is the kind of thing that fogs up a thread. I'm easily confused. Sorry about that but now I need to wonder which of the two gold dollars imaged in the thread coin every poster after this post is writing about.
The OP posted a coin's image. Then he asks a question. IMO, we should answer it. I for one don't care what other coins another member has. The MS-62 with a different color is semi-PL. Of course it's a different color.
I wrote all the above last night and forgot to post it due to TV program. I'm going to leave it up and take the heat today. .
The idea of grading coins AU-6X something has already been published. I for one like it. However, the system would be more precise if coins were graded technically: AU-55, light cleaning and priced for their value. Say $100,000 + in many cases.
PS IMO, and that of all (?) posters here, your coin is attractive.
Imagine what this would do to price guides?
An MS61 is worth exactly the same as an AU61. By definition
Beautiful AU coin....a better real value than many with "higher grades." Disturbed field from handling shows it is not uncirculated.
LOL, a 58 with a gold bean is worth more
Though, as previously stated, the shipping's gonna kill ya', let alone the $45.50 in new grading fees
I think it looks amazing for the grade in the TrueView. Did you submit it in the NGC slab? If so I wonder if it would have come back a 62 if cracked out and submitted.
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide
@tommy44 I did...I submitted for crossover. It was in an OGH NGC Ms61 slab.