| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 1,842 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
66 Posts |
Got some deep scars on the cheek so I am going to say MS63 DMPL.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1316 Posts |
Such a great year!
Ouch on the scars on the cheek. Quite a bit of chatter on the Reverse, but TPGs tend to be more lenient on that side.
Love the die cracks, don't see that too often on the CCs I suppose.
63PL, not sure we can get over those for what could have been a 64.
Edited by Collects82
12/22/2021 12:26 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6394 Posts |
Deep scratches on the cheek should limit the grade to 63 but the overall eye appeal might support a 64 grade. Too much field haze for DMPL but PL seems likely.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1048 Posts |
I've developed real, enduring hostility for "TrueView". I don't trust images labelled with that mark.
I'm gonna guess that PCGS gave it the DMPL ... that cheek scar is hard to ignore though. Must have been quite a knife fight.
MS62DMPL is where I land.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
MS63PL from these images.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
I agree with most others. Looks like a 63PL from these images but would not argue as high as 64 DMPL from PCGS based on your word.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1694 Posts |
MS-62PL due to her cheek which is a shame as otherwise I would of said 64. While true views may make some areas stand out they also may the coins look better.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'll say 63 DMPL, 64 wouldn't entirely surprise. Nice coin.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1298 Posts |
Couple major hits on the cheek. MS63 DMPL
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1316 Posts |
Quote:
I've developed real, enduring hostility for "TrueView". I don't trust images labelled with that mark. That's really where I am at. While they may have somewhat perfected the art of getting a good looking photo, how often do the actual coins actually look that nice in hand? I'm disappointed almost all of the time. The photos set such high expectations and the coins rarely live up to them. The new mantra around here might be "buy the coin, not the TrueView" |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
756 Posts |
@Collects82: I have seen it both ways. I have seen some coins that are a little crusty in person with get amazing true view images (at just the ONE right angle of lighting that would give the amazing color appearance of luster, and some (like this one) where marks seem much less visible and pronounced on the actual coin than they do on this image.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18687 Posts |
82(CC) is one of those years that are not typically sharp and bold at Carson City. PL or DMPL is not out of the question but difficult without something to determine depth. it looks DMPL. what a shame about that jaw hit. right where you dont want it and its pretty deep. I'm hoping you got a MS64 DMPL on the label but the is a possibility that hit could knock a full point.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1694 Posts |
I am sorry but if that got a 64 with that cheek PCGS has lost some serious credibility
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
756 Posts |
I am sorry JasonKFlo, but PCGS did call it MS(64)PL. The marks are less distracting in person, but I understand more and more the subjectivity of TPG. I also understand that for many of you, the neck marks are a deal-breaker. Thanks so much for your opinions!  Edited by Adam590
12/23/2021 8:38 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 16 / Views: 1,842 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 12/22/2021 12:26 am
