1873 Dollar - Let's play "guess the grade."
BillJones
Posts: 34,428 ✭✭✭✭✭
What do you think that grade is?
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
0
Comments
53
61
53, just wondering if it got dinged for all of the scrapes across LIBERTY and the viewers right field on the obverse. "Gasket" looks like it was edited using some program to remove the background (splotchy).
edited for a specific grade and spelling.
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, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
That's a tough one. I say obverse 45, reverse 55. But our host would probably go details for the scratches on the shield......
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
45 by wear but a "genuine" in plastic. Too many scratches on the obverse especially on the shield. It's a coin I would pass on.
55-58
I''d say 55-8, nice eye appeal, too much chatter to go Unc.
Just going with the percentages. Most of the OP's posts are about coins he considers overgraded. It's got frost on Liberty so that's my WAG using all information available.
AU53 here.
XF45 but possibly XF details given those scratches.
My YouTube Channel
45, net of the marks
BHNC #203
This piece has been dipped or cleaned, IMHO. The obverse scuffs on the shield detract enough that some people would consider it damaged. There is also a spot of environmental damage at the end of STATES that did not come off when the coin was (I suspect) dipped. There are three reasons for someone not to buy the coin. I would just pass on it if it were offered for sale, so I hope it's in a Genuine holder with AU details. Of course, it's probably not, or Bill wouldn't be outraged enough to post it!
45 if it grades.
Lack of luster has me concerned, but it could be the photo/scan. Detail wise it appears to be high AU or even mint state. However, I'd guess it's net graded to something like 53.
Is that a scan rather than a photograph? If so, I'd suspect its more lustrous than the photos suggest and my grade would likely go up.
55 technically to me, grade should be 50 to account for the scrs/scrapes/damage.
It's a coin that would be a tough sell in a non-details holder. (At least for me.)
I will say AU 50. Liberty's head has some wear and some of the stars, the obverse fields have that circulated thing going on. The damage on liberty could make it a details grade but i will say that it graded out ok.
MS60 and its in a regular slab.
Old school 45, new school 53?
But I agree with the comments on damage, cleaning, etc.
I will also add that I have been looking for a decent 1873 seated dollar in this grade range for YEARS and haven't come across any liked, and I'm really not very picky.
.
45
50
45 details, and I know nothing about grading these. That was my first impression and I'll stick with it. And, I wouldn't buy it either unless it was a really rare variety.
50
Personally, I can see the debate on this one. The fields, (apparent wear throughout, evidenced by the change in color in protected areas of the stars), says "Circulated"!!
Yet as pointed out the devices have a certain frosty MS quality....if you ignore the scratches and marks.
If I were considering it....I wouldn't pay much over XF-45 or AU-50 money. (But then, we've already determined I'm a cheap bastard).
I'll call it AU-53.
Added: By the way, what holder is that? The white rubber says NGC or ANACS, but the scalloped "home-made" quality of the edges says it's NOT a TPG holder???
Real tough ?
The coin has definite loss of luster on the high parts. Wear grade: AU-58.
Unfortunately, it is damaged, baggy, and cleaned (halo around the stars and relief). I'm going to guess, straight graded AU-50.
I don't believe the TPGS's "net grade" very often now that they have the "details" option so not XF.
AU details, damaged
It's probably in a 60 or 61 holder and overgraded at that, as everyone seems to agree.
It's got just a bit of wear, heavy bagmarks, and appears to have been lightly cleaned judging by the look of the obverse fields vs. the protected areas around the stars.
I really think that the marks are a bit too rough for it to deserve a straight grade holder. It's really a lightly damaged AU.
It looks like the wear of an AU 58 with the fields of an XF 45 with some scuffing. Tough one.
I would say AU details.
I agree with Rhedden, Pass!
I think I'm 55 with this one, but like others, wondering about the scrapes/scratches.
1TwoBits
@tradedollarnut said: Just going with the percentages. Most of the OP's posts are about coins he considers overgraded."
If true, and it appears you have done some research, do you have an opinion as to why ANY member (NOT YOU BILL as I don't wish to offend you further) would do this? Is it a ego thing to indicate a member knows more about coins than the TPGS?
If that happens to be the case here, I can live with a big ego when it is backed up and as long as there is some sort of GRADING LESSON in the post. As a student of grading, I have learned that there are under graded, over graded, and correctly graded coins in slabs. I learn more when members post (in their opinion) correctly graded coins.
PS @BillJones When you reveal the grade of this coin, will you please take the time to discuss the characteristics of the coin that you like and dislike and how/why you reached your personal opinion of its grade. Thanks in advance! A grading lesson from you would be priceless!
Is it in a TPG holder? Whose? Sure looks like a strange gasket.
Lance.
XF45 if it's not in a Details holder for one reason or another.
Dealing in Canadian and American coins and historical medals.
Au50
Grade posted on the slab - MS62
Actual grade if I was responsible for assigning a grade - AU details (obverse scratched or damage), I like the reverse except for the stain at 11:55.
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide
Seems to me that the "lesson" is in going through the thought process yourself, stating your own grade and opinion, comparing to what others say, and then seeing the opinion on the holder. You either agree, or you disagree. And in the process, you learn something about grading.
It doesn't require a "Big Time Grader", or "Big Ego", or anything else.....
I agree, just as I did above at 12:03 and just as you have done at 12:05 . I learn from a post that gives an opinion and the reasons why.
Now, we can both look forward to what the OP thinks and what the TPGS thought.
.
55 with an outside chance at 58.
peacockcoins
Did the OP say its any holder? It looks like the coin is resting comfortably in cotton or satin sheets with its battle scars.
Looks like a hard white insert w/ragged edges. Old NGC or PCI (no Bill wouldn't have it).
I found these pictures on another site. The position I present here was the consensus of the collectors there, some of whom are specialists in Seated Dollars.
The surfaces of this coin have been gone over with an abrasive. The evidence lies in the many hairlines and the small patches of original surfaces that are visible around the 5th and 6th stars (the other stars have “hallows around them as well.) on the obverse and a great deal of the lettering on the reverse. There is an area around the word “STATES” which is mostly untouched.
As such, giving this coin a straight grade depends upon your definition of “market acceptable.” Personally I would give it a “details grade.” I’ve seen coins that had far fewer disturbances that came back in a “body bag.”
Here is the photo of the full slab. Those who find my views offensive may now limber up their cannons for a salvo. I’m used to it. But those would like to think for themselves should take a second look at this coin if you liked it the first time.
Well, it's stickered, so.....
.
45? wow.. tough room! I don't see much/any wear. My initial impression was 60/61... maybe 58 now that I look a little harder.
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
If the marks in the fields were from circulation, you would have a point, but they are not. For whatever, reason someone decided to "improve" this coin by rubbing it with something, perhaps as simple as a pencil erasure.
The sharpness of the design details is not the only grading point. Surfaces and original mint luster count too, and when metal has been moved on a coin's surface with a physical device, that is the start of problems.
I knew that there was no way that this was MS.
At first glance, my thought process ranged it from XF 45-AU 53.
So, AU 50 sounds right, as it falls directly in the middle.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Here is a 1911-D qurater eagle. This coin is genuine, and at the time I bought it 1988, it was graded and priced as an AU. This coin came bouncing back to me in a body bag from NGC because of "improper cleaning." I have circled the offending area in red.
Maybe there was a copper spot there, I don't know. I did see this spot when I bought the coin in 1988 and thought nothing of it because the piece was only an AU. If it had been graded Unc., that would have been a different story and probably double the money.
Stuff like this counted 15 years ago. Now it seems like it does not matter, even it is more extensive.
50 seems about right.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Well okay. I guess there is now hope for my formerly body bagged 1911-D quarter eagle. It's good to know.
If you really believe this to be the case then I would indeed resubmit
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I saw a 1907 $20 HR today. The dealer said it was originally in AU-58 slab (service I don't know). He cracked and sent it to #1 or #2 and they graded it MS-61. He cracked it and sent it to the other #1 or #2. Now it is in an MS-62 slab.
The coin is a technical AU-58. w/the typical rub spots. However, I think it is now correctly COMMERCIAL graded as an MS-62. IMHO, the first TPGS graded it 61 due to some rather large scratches when you looked closely. Just eyeballing the slab it in now looks like an under graded MS-63!
Now, the soapbox rant which will not change anything:
This sort of thing must happen all the time and it is both frustrating and NUTS! IMO, all of the knowledgeable folks here would look at the coin in hand, wink and grade it AU-58 and then add BUT...something so = It's Mint State.
Try teaching that to a collector. First teach them to learn what loss of luster is, what loss of detail is, what an original surface looks like, and then teach them the "BUT" part of commercial grading. Now take the grading test. Anyone who graded the coin between AU-58 and MS-62 or even a low MS-63 (?) without the benefit of knowing what the coin is actually worth would be correct. See, grading is very subjective but it need not be. The coin is an AU-58.