Options
Anyone care to Guess the Grade?
zas107
Posts: 831 ✭✭✭
0
zas107
Posts: 831 ✭✭✭
Comments
A coin with that much detail should have a decent amount of luster. The surfaces look flat which leads me to believe they have been altered.
It has a good deal of luster, my photos are simply bad. It is actually quite reflective (and straight graded).
In that case, I'll go with 62.
Wonderful strike and pleasing surfaces. MS64 (as PCGS is stingy with GEM grades for the series.)
I am thinking 63+
Nice-looking coin. Depends a lot on the luster, but somewhere around 64 seems likely.
63, the reverse rim ding may limit the grade.
i'm with HighRelief.. 63+
I'd go 65 if it were not for the rim ding on the reverse
https://www.cointalk.com/media/albums/the-2020-20-large-cent-set.1855/
62 because you said it straight graded. But I also noticed the reverse rim ding before you qualified that it had graded.
Tough crowd! No one has hit it yet
The reason no one has hit it is the photos show no luster at all. Luster is king in MS coins. If it had a lot of luster I would guess 65+. If not 62.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
64+ and regardless of the assigned grade, the coin looks as if it has adequate luster. Despite some of the comments in this thread, I see numerous classic coins graded as high as 66 with no more apparent luster than this one.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
65...and nice coin!
K
right or wrong the lighting sucks.
I think I'm nuts seeing others' grades, including @MFeld
altered surfaces would have been my first choice
Burnt lustre 58 rub on thigh/knee
64+ at PCGS. 65/65+ at NGC.
Looks like a text book 58 or 58+ to me.
58 was actually my first thought. The “tough crowd” comment caused me to be flexible.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Neither of us can grade from pictures
NNCS 66
I'll guess 64.
Great to see you Dan.
I told you years ago you'd be picking me off some day 
edited to add: Dan used to be an Ebay shark. I'd like to bet against myself on this one.
He also used to fetishize Trade Dollar varieties
Ms 61
I'd like to thank the OP for cleaning his fingernails before handling the coin. Certainly a lost art.... :'(
Soooooo, I'm going to go out on a limb and assume this coin now lives in a PCGS holder????
It's pretty clean, with nice fields, nice detail, and one pretty significant rim bump. I agree with everyone else - the photo suggests a dull, lifeless coin. Assuming the luster is good, I'd be somewhere around MS64 or 64+. If it looks like the photos in-hand, I'd be somewhere around MS61-62. The lighting used for these photos makes them pretty hard to interpret.
Good to see you around as well Rick!
I've been known to find a thing or two here and there on eBay still, but I'd probably bet against myself on most things grading related these days. Trade Dollars continue to be the most fortuitous series for me to cherrypick
55
Strike is all there but I can't get the surfaces from the lighting.
58 because of rub on knee and rims.
USAF (Ret) The purpose of Bourbon is to make you feel like you should feel WITHOUT Bourbon. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
Yes it is in a pcgs holder My pictures are truly terrible. It appears like there is minor rub but there is not. The coin was submitted walk-through Service as the value warranted it and PCGS agreed if that is any hint as to the grade.
It can be difficult to assess coins based even upon good images. It can be folly to try to do so when the images are “truly terrible”. Perhaps it would have been better to have waited and posted better images for a “guess the grade”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You are absolutely right Mark! Not that one can grade all that well from true views but I will post that when it is available. Hopefully soon as it was graded last week.
Well... My first impression was AU... and 53 if I had to choose a number.... I assume the pictures were prior to grading....Cheers, RickO
Walkthrough?
That's the tier for coins $20K or more value. And that was confirmed by its expected grade being validated by the grade assigned.
MS66+ ? 1854-S weak "S"?
Am I irritated because I guessed wrong? Every grade above 60 had already been mentioned and I didn't like the "the picture of" the coin. so no 62 (64 with rub). Or is it because I made the erroneous assumption that these were reasonably accurate images available and then wasted my time. My bad! :'(
@Mfeld is too kind.
So what is it?
Here is a slightly better photo of the obverse. The coin is a proof which I don't think many picked up on. Will post the grade soon™
MS63
based on that photo 68 CAC
If it’s a Proof, the images are even worse than I thought.🤭😮
😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Wow, I would never have guessed that it was a proof based on those photos. I guess I need to expand my horizons beyond proof dollars.
Next you're going to tell me that you bought it off of eBay, which is really going to make me sulk!
I typically don't photograph coins (obviously). The photo was taken under a grading lamp (100 watt crystal clear GE bulb). I think maybe it was too bright to show the reflectivity. I'm heading over the BST to buy a photo setup if I can find the thread lol.
If the original post had also said: hint, it’s a proof; I might have guessed that it was a details grade. The photo makes seem totally devoid of reflectivity. With the second photo, perhaps if I use my imagination...
Trueview posted, the coin graded proof-65 by our hosts.
That looks a bit different and nicer.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
omg this is like the worse GTG ever - proof is guesses at 58-64's , I was on the fence at 62, best thing you have going here was super clean fingernails.
P.S. Seriously nice piece, I'd never have guessed that a PF65 - wow
The TV really brings out the color. To repeat what I said originally: nice-looking coin.
Have I been here 10 years? Those are among (if not) the worst images I have ever seen here.
If you know in advance the pictures are "terrible", why post as a tease(?). The second image made my eyes bleed.
The coin could be superb. I hope and could imagine so. You should be proud and happy to display it. I've owned at least six proofs of the type and seen quite a few more. Very few of the type are flashy, rather grungy or dusky original.
With so much of the imagery on this thread having misdirected me, I'm wondering if those clean fingernails actually belong to the OP.
List that coin up for 99 cent start auction on ebay with your 1st pictures. Then privately send me the trueviews. I will happily be the high bidder!
Although it is fun to guess, I'm really gonna have to stop. I agree with the rub thing, even though it isn't there.
:::::::::::::Snap salute to the COLONEL:::::::::::::::::::::::::
Pete
@zas107 - while I am no less critical of your photography skills than I was before, I should have constructively mentioned that there are numerous threads on the Forum about at-home photography
Well, I'm all over the map now that there are updated images! I was initially going to say AU58 of 58+ because I thought I saw an area of rub on Liberty's knee... I'm not so sure with the True Views... MS64/65??
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.