Options
I can't decide if this is the ugliest MS67 or just one that's different.
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
I saw this while looking at some Walkers on eBay and my initial thought was ugh-leeeeeeeeeee, but after I stared at it for a moment it looked a little nicer. Still not something I would want or consider buying and maybe not even a coin I could see as an MS67, but I don't think it is as ugly as my first impression.
What do you think of the coin and the grade.
Al H.
0
Comments
they should grade it U67 the U meaning UGLY !!!!!
Eye-appeal that negative should disqualify a coin from a grade of 67 and probably lower grades as well.
I bet in hand it’s excellent. The TrueViews tend to offer very flat and low contrast lighting that are intended to highlight color over luster. The luster on this is probably awesome and the color likely looks great in person.
I am in the ugly camp, reverse is better.
@keets asked: "What do you think of the coin and the grade."
Eye appeal is a rather personal thing. Nevertheless, it seems to change now and then for a large for the majority of folks. I liken it to fashion. Men's ties change in width and female hemlines go up and down. It seems it cannot be stopped. Try to buy a narrow tie today. We are forced into certain patterns of fashion - like it or not. I'm going to keep my comments about hemlines to myself for obvious reasons.
So, as long as the color of a coin can affect its value more than its actual and true condition of preservation.... 
Now here's what I think of this coin: I think it best that when pulling images off the Net to show something, it would be best to CROP THEM in a way that they cannot be easily identified.
In my opinion, it’s more like environmental damage. The toning process has gone too far on the obverse.
I’d prefer a more even toning pattern on the obverse, but I don’t consider the coin to be unattractive. My guess is that it looks prettier/more appealing in hand, but even if not, it bespeaks originality.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Unless it looks significantly better in hand, I would have absolutely no interest in purchasing this coin. Based on the picture, the obverse toning reminds me of rust on some seldom used tools in my garage.
Just my opinion
Thank You for pointing out just one more variable that Commercial grading introduced into the grading equation along with the value, strike, and all the others! Maybe someone can let us know when haze, becomes toning. Or when toning becomes just tarnish or corrosion.
The Market will tell us as soon as it finishes working on next year's tie width and hemline lengths
Based on what I see in the images, in my opinion, the toning is uneven and mottled, but nowhere close to environmental damage. I’ve seen similar toning on quite a few other Walking Liberty halves and Mercury dimes. Often, it looks quite attractive, in-hand.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
If attractive toning adds a point, they should have taken one away for this coin.
I'd bet the luster shines through wonderfully on this coin. The image is very flat. If the toning became thick enough to impact the luster, it would not qualify for an MS67 grade.
Very nice coin. Toning should not affect technical grade at all. The surfaces look very clean and mark free. It would be a WOW coin if the obverse matched the reverse toning wise. As is I would not call it ugly and it is deserving of the grade.JMHO.
I think the reverse is beautiful. Without seeing it in hand I can't opine on whether the obverse disqualifies it from a 67 grade. That said, it would disqualify me as a potential buyer of the coin.
Thou hath bespoken truth, verily I say!
Interesting coin, but that obverse makes me runneth away, as Mark might say. 😉
"She comes out of the sun in a silk dress,
running like a water color in the rain...."
If it was a MS 64 grade level yes it is attractive and I would buy it quick.
At the MS67 grade level no it's unattractive. Too much deep toning to enjoy it as an MS67.
Please elaborate as to why these PCGS (or NGC) cert. numbers should be cropped out of images.
I’ve noticed a push for the last several years to make these kind of toned coins desirable. When a collector is considering a crusty brown widget and posts a picture here on the forum, there
is always a group extolling it’s beauty and luster. I suspect there is a large number of these in need of a new home, hence the hype. Selling a beautiful coin is easy. The ugly ones involve some salesmanship.
Don't forget that PCGS cannot possibly peel back that oxidation to give that coin a technical grade and I understand that their assessment is just an appraisal at most.
spfffgh
Or they can be both at the same time.
Not for me will leave to toning hobbyist
Toning that deep can hide imperfections. Remove the toning and those imperfections can become obvious.
The reverse is one of the best I have seen. The obverse my look exceptional in hand, it is hard to capture luster in pics.
That reverse is stunning!
100% Positive BST transactions
I'm in the ugly camp, but then I don't like tarnish.
Donato
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
That's what we called a double bagger in my younger days.
It’s not my cup of tea. If we all liked the same coins this hobby would be pretty boring and the doctors would have a field day ruining everything.
I go with different.
The obverse toning, the way it leaves her face and upper body exposed, is interestingly balanced. And the reverse, imo, is very nice.
If it was to be my only example, I would pass. But as part of a set, it is.....different.
Quite the monster toner
I actually quite like it...
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I do not like that crunchy tone to the obv, ruins the coin for me and I wouldn't want it for my collection at any price above melt.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
From a photo alone you are guessing. Ever purchase a coin you have not seen in hand and it looks totally different when you receive it? I have and it goes both ways. The same goes for guess the grades. Some of my GTG have seen a majority of the guesses either 2 points high or 2 points low. I would not be tempted to purchase this coin from the photo but in hand it might be a stunner.
Easy if you think about it. We can find examples of over graded, under graded, and correctly graded coins all over the place including in TPGS holders. Grading HAS BECOME even more subjective than it was at one time at authentication services. There will always be disagreement as to taste and eye appeal. Even here on CU some folks post obviously damaged coins (remember the SL50c with the large scratch in the obverse field?) that are straight graded and for what reason? To point out how smart they are? A top TPGS has evaluated the coin. If you don't like the grade fine; but IMO all identifying info should be removed. The coin can be discussed w/o knowing who assigned the grade.
Fact: Part of the obverse rim of the coin we are discussing has a corroded edge that can NEVER be fixed enough to fool the guys who work on these. However, it can be restored enough to fool the rest of you
BUT w ho would be dumb enough to ruin such a desirable coin to many knowledgeable dealers/collectors. 
I'm having a hard tip figuring this out. Perhaps a few moer images (high & low) would be helpful.
Not bad ... l sorta like it.
Not sure what is hiding under all that crust?
If it were dipped would it still be a technical 67?
I don't like it....All I see is a lot of deep russet toning from improper storage. My 2 cents....
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I'm thinking it must have great luster in hand.
I imagine it's probably graded correctly and it's probably one of those coins that is stunning in-hand, but ugly in photos. I saw a 20c piece just like that at the Long Beach show. In any case, It would be a much easier coin to buy than to sell. I'd never want to own it.
I kinda like it, but would have to see it in hand before I played or passed. As others have said, could be one of those that is amazing in person but doesn't face up well in 2D.
Gonna get me a $50 Octagonal someday. Some. Day.
I would have to see it in hand, if it's like the picture it's a pass for me.
Fighting the Fight for 11 Years with the big "C" - Never Ever Give Up!
Member PCGS Open Forum board 2002 - 2006 (closed end of 2006) Current board since 2006 Successful trades with many members, over the past two decades, never a bad deal.
@Justacommeman what say you?
"She comes out of the sun in a silk dress,
running like a water color in the rain...."
I like it. Call me the oddball.
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
Uglier than a pan of fried a-holes.
I like the reverse.
My YouTube Channel
Ugly!
that type of toning isn't my cup of tea so to say
1997-present
It seems like it's not loved enough to be showcased in a registry set right now
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/38493644
Its not in the CAC database either. LOL.