| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,187 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1267 Posts |
Not my coin, but fairly decent pics to grade from soooooo......... Whatcha' guys think?   Image:  84-ccms.jpg64.28 KB Image: 84-ccmsr.jpg68.62 KB Edited by hadleydog
01/15/2007 05:23 am
|
|
|
|
Forum Mom
 United States
5877 Posts |
MS63. A little too much chatter on the cheek and some milk spots in the left obverse field. Beautiful strike and I really like the rose-gold toning on the obverse (or is this due to the lighting?).
|
|
Valued Member
United States
140 Posts |
i'll give it a grade of ms-62. looks like there is a marks on the check and there looks to be a heavy mark above the eagle reverse.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
63 in today's market. I have the feeling it's not as chattery as it looks, but what's there is in all the wrong places.
|
|
Forum Mom
United States
5877 Posts |
quote:
Originally posted by SuperDave
63 in today's market. I have the feeling it's not as chattery as it looks, but what's there is in all the wrong places.
 |
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
1267 Posts |
Well, no ones got it yet. Nope. Nada.  Graded by NGC, newer holder. Common date, but still a Carson City. Any more guesses? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1703 Posts |
Actually, I though it looked MS64, with the frosted Miss Liberty,It makes the contact marks look worse than they are.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1454 Posts |
I am thinking it may be designated MS-64DMPL? The toning on the obverse looks like it hides it some. I almost was thinking it was a proof but don't want to go out on that limb yet.
Edited by Irishraider
01/15/2007 10:39 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1267 Posts |
Edited by hadleydog
01/15/2007 11:45 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
577 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Not in a million years would I call that coin a 66. It's nice; I'd own it proudly. However, part and parcel of accepted grading standards is that any marks on an MS66 coin not be in focal areas. I would have believed, with a sense of slight disgust, MS65. I'd have accepted MS64 as typical market grading. But 66? No. The reverse doesn't reach 66, much less the obverse.
And remember, I make no attempt to hide the fact that I market grade, and am for that reason easier on a given coin than Susan, for instance.
Nothing against you, hadleydog - your good taste and judgement stand proven here at Coin Community - but that coin does not belong in that slab, and I sincerely hope you got one of your usual "couldn't beat it at gunpoint" deals on this one.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1267 Posts |
It's OK, SuperDave. I've not lost my mind. Completely. As I stated in the first post, I do not own this coin. I found her on the 'bay, and was shocked when I saw the grade.  I wanted to use her to show that even the big boys can make a mistake, and not just a little one either. I would grade this coin a high end 63 to low end 64, if it were an 80-s. Add the Carson City bump the graders like to hand out, and she ends up a real ms64, I'd say a gift at 65. The ms66 grade is simply absurd. Hey, I think you all nailed the grade on this one. Moral of the story? Trust yourself to judge a coin instead of relying on the insert and the holder.  Edited by hadleydog
01/16/2007 6:20 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Ah. I missed the "not my coin" part. I was worried for you there, for a minute.  |
|
Forum Mom
United States
5877 Posts |
WOW!!!! MS66 is totally out of line for this coin! I wonder who submitted it for grading. I know the TPG's say it doesn't matter who submits the coins and that the graders aren't told where they came from, but my experience says otherwise. I think this coin must have been submitted by one of the "big boys" and got a couple points bumped for that.  This is a prime example of the codicil, "Buy the coin, not the plastic." |
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,187 |
|
Posted 01/15/2007 10:58 am
