Picked up an upgrade to my ANACS photo cert type set. 1866 with rays.

relicsncoins · February 1, 2026 2:19PM

Seller's photos. My current piece is a VF20/20
AI's description of the auction; The Del Mar Collection (1980): A massive auction held on August 8, 1980, containing 1,333 lots, often associated with the Garrett Collection.

coinbuf · February 1, 2026 3:45PM

Nice!

Batman23 · February 1, 2026 3:53PM

Looks nice!

davewesen · February 1, 2026 4:20PM

That looks awful nice for a MS60

In those early years was ANACS grading uncirculated in more than MS60, 63, 65, 67?

relicsncoins · February 1, 2026 4:35PM

@davewesen said:
That looks awful nice for a MS60

In those early years was ANACS grading uncirculated in more than MS60, 63, 65, 67?

No, those were the only MS grades used then.

56morgan · February 1, 2026 5:38PM

I have some generation 9 and 10 ANACS photocerts graded ms-63/64.

relicsncoins · February 1, 2026 5:46PM

@56morgan said:
I have some generation 9 and 10 ANACS photocerts graded ms-63/64.

Yeah, they started using other grades later. I have a bunch with 62 and 64 grades.

johnny9434 · February 2, 2026 12:32AM

Nice score 👍

NumisOxide · February 2, 2026 4:54AM

Nice pickup

Walkerguy21D · February 2, 2026 6:23AM

Very cool to see a key type coin of that caliber still with the original ANACS grading.

CaptHenway · February 2, 2026 2:12PM

@davewesen said:
That looks awful nice for a MS60

In those early years was ANACS grading uncirculated in more than MS60, 63, 65, 67?

@davewesen said:
That looks awful nice for a MS60

In those early years was ANACS grading uncirculated in more than MS60, 63, 65, 67?

When I was hired in 1978 to start the ANA's grading service, the book published in 1977 with the grading standards had only 60, 65 and 70 for the Mint State and Proof grades. We ran several test batches of grading coins, and I decided that those three grades were not enough, especially since "70" coins were going to be virtually non-existent. (We never thought that anybody would ever need to grade modern mint products. I'm not sure that I think so now.)

So, after discussing the question with the other Authenticator/Graders and Ed Rochette, I made the decision to add 63 and 67 to the numbers before we opened for submissions on March 1, 1979. I chose 63 because it was more than halfway from 60 to 65, and I wanted the level to be nicer than the average "BU" coin. I chose 67 because it was symmetrical to 65 with 63.

I'm not sure when the hobby started using 61, 62, 64, 66, 68 and 69, or when we started using some or all of those levels. It may or may not have been by the time that we graded this piece in late 1980. I can tell you that quite often we downgraded coins with problems like this one has, the weak strike, down to the lowest number within the technical grade, in this case Mint State. So, it is theoretically possible that any one of the three top tier TPGs today might call it a 61 or a 62, though I still think that the label should include the qualifier "weak strike."

TD

(P.S.: No, I do not remember the coin, though I am sure that I handled it.)

davewesen · February 2, 2026 5:52PM

thx for the history CaptHenway

I remember getting a few good deals on early photocerts because of the conservative grading with few grade levels.
I have a trade dollar with chopmarks that cert called MS 60/60 and PCGS gave it a MS62 once they started grading chopmarks.

relicsncoins · February 2, 2026 11:14PM

@CaptHenway said:

@davewesen said:
That looks awful nice for a MS60

In those early years was ANACS grading uncirculated in more than MS60, 63, 65, 67?

@davewesen said:
That looks awful nice for a MS60

In those early years was ANACS grading uncirculated in more than MS60, 63, 65, 67?

When I was hired in 1978 to start the ANA's grading service, the book published in 1977 with the grading standards had only 60, 65 and 70 for the Mint State and Proof grades. We ran several test batches of grading coins, and I decided that those three grades were not enough, especially since "70" coins were going to be virtually non-existent. (We never thought that anybody would ever need to grade modern mint products. I'm not sure that I think so now.)

So, after discussing the question with the other Authenticator/Graders and Ed Rochette, I made the decision to add 63 and 67 to the numbers before we opened for submissions on March 1, 1979. I chose 63 because it was more than halfway from 60 to 65, and I wanted the level to be nicer than the average "BU" coin. I chose 67 because it was symmetrical to 65 with 63.

I'm not sure when the hobby started using 61, 62, 64, 66, 68 and 69, or when we started using some or all of those levels. It may or may not have been by the time that we graded this piece in late 1980. I can tell you that quite often we downgraded coins with problems like this one has, the weak strike, down to the lowest number within the technical grade, in this case Mint State. So, it is theoretically possible that any one of the three top tier TPGs today might call it a 61 or a 62, though I still think that the label should include the qualifier "weak strike."

TD

(P.S.: No, I do not remember the coin, though I am sure that I handled it.)

Man what a great story. Thanks for the awesome history.

Picked up an upgrade to my ANACS photo cert type set. 1866 with rays.

Comments

Leave a Comment