It's in a NGC MS64 holder. The luster is pretty good. I'm not sure why it isn't graded higher unless they were suspicious about the color. There are some very light marks on the leg just below the hand. But they're minor.
I bought it at PTVetters table from Kranky who was helping him out that day. It was consigned to PTVetter by another board member, but I can't remember who.
I like that toning, I especially like seeing toning like that on Barber Dimes... but I hate toned Mercurys... *shrug* Personal choic I guess, but that is quite a beaut, two thumbs up!
<< <i>It's in a NGC MS64 holder. The luster is pretty good. I'm not sure why it isn't graded higher unless they were suspicious about the color. There are some very light marks on the leg just below the hand. But they're minor.
I bought it at PTVetters table from Kranky who was helping him out that day. It was consigned to PTVetter by another board member, but I can't remember who. >>
Very pretty Walker Woodie..... I don't see enough marks on the coin to keep it from grading higher, and it has a great strike, but if the colors in the photo are accurate I would agree with you that NGC might have been suspicious of it being original toning....... Are if there is any rub on the high points? It's really hard to tell exactly why this coin didn't grade higher than ms64, (except for the toning), without actually seeing the coin...... But regardless it is still very pretty Walker, and you did good!
I think this is an interesting Walker. A few folks have mentioned the grading service might not have graded it higher because they weren't sure of the toning. I know the services do this sometimes and I do not agree with this method. Either it's good or it's bad, not "well I'm not sure so I'll give it a low grade."
Having said that, IMO I don't think they graded it with caution. I say this because if they went let's say 65.... it still doesn't make it an expensive coin by the sheets. Now I understand this is not a sheet price coin.
mdwoods mentions the luster is "Pretty good." Perhaps if it's only pretty good, that is what held it back from a higher grade. I mentioned this was an interesting Walker at the beginning of my ramble here, because I've not seen one quite like this one. I do look at a lot of toned Walkers at shows as well.
I've seen a couple Proofs with similar color. But just because I haven't seen one toned quite like this one, doesn't mean I'm saying I feel it's not a good coin. I'd like to see this one in person. It's "Interesting."
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
that "other board member" was Vam44. you did a very fine job of capturing the color, though the reverse seems to me a bit darker in hand. still nice, but like stman said, it probably was held back due to impaired luster as opposed to suspect color. the toning is actually so intense that it may overwhelm the luster to a degree.
hey, i have an idea!! let's dip that sucker, brighten it up a bit!!
Comments
Is that a proof? It sure looks nice. Puff is going to be after you now
Russ, NCNE
I bought it at PTVetters table from Kranky who was helping him out that day. It was consigned to PTVetter by another board member, but I can't remember who.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
42/92
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
<< <i>It's in a NGC MS64 holder. The luster is pretty good. I'm not sure why it isn't graded higher unless they were suspicious about the color. There are some very light marks on the leg just below the hand. But they're minor.
I bought it at PTVetters table from Kranky who was helping him out that day. It was consigned to PTVetter by another board member, but I can't remember who. >>
Very pretty Walker Woodie..... I don't see enough marks on the coin to keep it from grading higher, and it has a great strike, but if the colors in the photo are accurate I would agree with you that NGC might have been suspicious of it being original toning....... Are if there is any rub on the high points? It's really hard to tell exactly why this coin didn't grade higher than ms64, (except for the toning), without actually seeing the coin...... But regardless it is still very pretty Walker, and you did good!
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
Dave
Having said that, IMO I don't think they graded it with caution. I say this because if they went let's say 65.... it still doesn't make it an expensive coin by the sheets. Now I understand this is not a sheet price coin.
mdwoods mentions the luster is "Pretty good." Perhaps if it's only pretty good, that is what held it back from a higher grade. I mentioned this was an interesting Walker at the beginning of my ramble here, because I've not seen one quite like this one. I do look at a lot of toned Walkers at shows as well.
I've seen a couple Proofs with similar color. But just because I haven't seen one toned quite like this one, doesn't mean I'm saying I feel it's not a good coin. I'd like to see this one in person. It's "Interesting."
that "other board member" was Vam44. you did a very fine job of capturing the color, though the reverse seems to me a bit darker in hand. still nice, but like stman said, it probably was held back due to impaired luster as opposed to suspect color. the toning is actually so intense that it may overwhelm the luster to a degree.
hey, i have an idea!! let's dip that sucker, brighten it up a bit!!
al h.
Hey Al,
Has anyone guessed the latest movie quote as spoken by Sydney Penny as Megan Wheeler in the Clint Eastwood film "Pale Rider"?
Cheers,
Bob
i'll probably be deluged with guesses now that you let the cat outa the bag!!
al h.