Caballito Again. Guess the Grade of this Slabbed 1910 Specimen

When the view that you have about what seems to be nearly every TPG-graded coin is that it is graded incorrectly, it might be time to consider that perhaps you are misunderstanding something about grading. You’ve been making these posts for at least four or five years now.

Never mind Rex. You can’t argue with a 20-something with 50 years experience. 😉

I’ll call it AU Details since I can’t see the luster from the photo and due to the scratches on the obverse.

You’re posting blurry cellphone images of a TrueView on a desktop screen. Grading from any set of photos is unreliable enough, but at this quality the grade could be wildly off from anyone’s guess in the thread and it would have no actual input on the accuracy of the grade on the label. We would really need to see the coin in hand for an accurate assessment, even if the photos were better. It doesn’t take 50 years of experience to know that.

My best guess from these photos would be a low end AU58, but it could just as easily be an AU55 with a net for the scratches, or an MS62 that is technically UNC and only looks circulated because of the photo. Who knows? The entire image is criss-crossed with lines from your desktop screen.

That being said, if we’re going for personal attacks and accusations of bias here, I’ve seen confusion between hairlines and die lines before in at least two of these threads. I also consistently see that at least one or two commenters will guess the grade correctly, and rarely will any guess the grade you expected. That leads me to conclude that there is likely some misunderstanding going on on your end, and perhaps some sort of personal vendetta against grading services.

You can be an expert on everything there is to know about a series and not be proficient at grading that series, and vice versa. They are two distinct areas of expertise. I enjoy your discovery threads, and I think a lot of the coins you own and discuss are very interesting and unique. I find your other threads to be valuable and informative and I look forward to reading them. I do not find these threads to be valuable at all, and they’re getting tiring.

https://d1htnxwo4o0jhw.cloudfront.net/pcgs/cert/21318446/large/177337492.jpg

https://d1htnxwo4o0jhw.cloudfront.net/cert/31150230/98279859.jpg

https://d1htnxwo4o0jhw.cloudfront.net/pcgs/cert/43836813/238716427.jpg

If that’s a 63, my 62 is at least a 64 and my 64 is at least a 66.

@Rexford we are just having a little fun. Chill, man! It’s not a big deal. People are always learning. Even you can learn here.

This is better than daily comments about yet another fake 1909-S VDB 1c on eBay.

How is it any less aggressive and personal to say the following, than to say anything I wrote?

“I am pointing out examples of why we don't drink Kool-Aid and look at the COINS. themselves. You have consistently shown out to be one of the drinkers of such.”

“Never mind Rex. You can’t argue with a 20-something with 50 years experience.”

“You've no idea what I know and what I do not. So step to it, and respond or go on to other posts.”

This entire thread, from the initial biased and targeted post, is aggressive.

I will note this is the first time I have actually found one of the coins you show to legitimately be questionably graded, but there have been many posts now. @coinkat cited an instance where I messed up on a sub a few years back. I took that experience and decided to learn from it, and six months ago when I took that coin out and took another look at it, I said, “yeah, there’s absolutely no way that’s a proof.” I see no learning happening here.

Look, here’s a “gtg” (i.e., “I disagree with the grade and want to bash the TPGs”) post from 2015 that uses a TrueView shot with axial lighting, which hides any hairlines (which is the primary factor in proof grading): https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/955521/guess-the-grade-proof-1839-1-2-crown#latest

Here’s another from 2017 regarding a cleaned coin, again shot from axial lighting that hides hairlines: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/985184/victorian-rarity-1863-1-shilling-guess-the-grade-if-youd-like#latest

(and again, the same coin in 2018): https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1008731/1863-1-shilling-i-bet-you-dont-guess-the-grade#latest

Another from 2017: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/988469/rarity-in-victorian-great-britain-halfcrowns-but-even-better-beauty-gtg#latest where you write, “TPGs seem quite variable as to grades assigned, and I say that euphemistically & will leave out any theories as to why that is the case (I will hint that many Brit coins in the Millennium Collection got IMO pushes of 2-3 points).”

Again, in 2018, from axial TrueViews you make the conclusion that
“1st Proof Deep Cameo 67+
2nd Proof Deep Cameo 63(+)
Having seen them, absolutely no way. The second is the equal if not superior to the first, but IMO would drop the first to a 65DC and raise the second to a 65+DC.”
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1010492/1839-deep-cameo-proof-victoria-halfcrowns-im-not-getting-the-pcgs-grading#latest
And I commented “ The second one is photographed under lighting that hides hairlines, while the first is photographed under contrasted lighting that worsens the look of any flaws on the surface. The second picture is also a TrueView so it was shot raw, while the first is presumably shot in the slab and there may be marks on the surface of the slab that appear to be on the coin in the photo. Without seeing both in hand I don't think I would be personally be able to make an accurate guess.”

2020: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1046369/a-rather-decent-halfcrown-perhaps-as-good-as-you-will-see-1839-proof#latest
“It graded PCGS 63 Deep Cameo. I was shocked at the low grade.”

Another from 2020: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/12571891#Comment_12571891
Another proof shot in axial lighting posted by the PCGS social media account, you have to put it out there that “I've seen worse grading than that on some major Brit coins....”

There’s another one I can’t find that mixes up hairlines and dielines on a proof. That in and of itself is totally fine and understandable, but when you’re repeatedly accusing the expert graders at the TPGs of grading wildly incorrectly, and refusing to back down or admit after years of this that maybe there are other factors leading you to the conclusions that you’re coming to, it’s not a good look.

@pruebas said:
Even you can learn here.

Or not....

But please spare us the righteous indignation and just don't open the OP's threads.

This really is not the discussion that is the norm on the darkside.

Seems that reason as well as the subjective nature of grading has taken a back seat in terms of how this discussion has progressed. All I was trying to do was acknowledge that we have two numismatists that have achieved and shared accomplishments here... through different means...and that the subjective component associated with grading rarely should escalate to the level that it has in this thread.

Remember that reasonable minds can differ without one being right and the other wrong.

It really is time to move on.

@7Jaguars said:
I'm done with Rexford and will not respond to his drivel any longer. He is beyond help.

I have also posted the OP as NOT a coin that I own and as a major caveat to those interested in the series.

I will say in addressing others that by far the majority of my posts have been about discovery and commentary, and that the vast majority of the coins I have seen that I am in agreement with designations and grade & have simply pointed out those that do not. When not in agreement have cited world-renowned experts that in fact agree with me. I also was a significant contributor to major catalogues with opinion well respected.

I agree, move on.

Rex is one of the finest numismatists I know and I'm not alone in that. In 20 years, his name will be fairly well known, I'd guess.

@7Jaguars said:
LOL

It's funny how you have to insult others and belittle them to hold yourself up despite context and logic showing you don't have a clue.

Later Gator.