GTG 1876 Trade Dollar

overall its a nice proof. looks like original skin is gone though. I'm going with PF62 due to that. I don't think they called it impaired as the coin does not appear to have ever seen any type of circulation

Proof-60!

Old white holder? I'd say PR61. It does have hairlines but these coins were not handled when newly struck with the same care that they are treated with today, and many were given "cabinet wipes" even before being sold.

I'll say PR-62.

I'm a little surprised by the 61. there are some fine hairlines on both sides but not enough to net it down that low. majority could even be polish lines which are more visible on proofs. just my opinion

Proofs are held to a higher standard and rightfully so. That being said, early proofs often get a bit of leeway because they were routinely handled, cleaned, and wiped down.

I think ANACS net graded this coin, which is in line with how Proofs have historically been graded. In other words, ANACS likely started at a base grade (PR65) and then deducted grade points for hairlines in the fields and impaired luster, and arrived at their conclusion of PR61. My experience with early Proofs is that since strike quality, wear and circulation are not usually relevant factors, the differences between PR60 and PR65 are instead accounted for by eye appeal. A Proof 60 coin and a Proof 65 coin might have the precise same strike quality (especially if struck from one die pair and in limited quantity) but whereas a PR65 coin looks nearly untouched, a PR60 coin will show extensive signs of handling, distracting marks, poor luster, etc.

Keep us informed!

good comment on proofs paralyse. I agree it was probably netted. I would not attempt to cross it over. at best it would bump 1 grade and could possibly be deemed impaired. leave it be, not worth the risk and $$