| Author |
 Replies: 58 / Views: 5,363 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Taiwan
606 Posts |
Mint State coins and Specimen/PR coins have different grading criteria. The 1951 MS64 Dollar is allowed to have a few disturbances. The 1951 SP 64 Dollar is not allowed to have this luxury as Dollarman pointed out in an earlier post. If Dollarmans 1951 SP Dollar had the marks as the 1951 MS 64 Dollar I would consider it an Impaired SP and a SP 60 coin at best. Also, TPG's (PCGS/NGC) will grade a coin higher than its technical merits, it is called market grading. ICCS is your technical grader. Edited by Everest
12/14/2016 12:41 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
If you put the OP's SP64 coin and my MS64 coin side by side there isn't that much difference in the contact marks on either coin.   Edited by trout1105
12/14/2016 1:01 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
581 Posts |
Look at g6 on your coin compared to his. Yours has tons of contact marks, whereas his does not.his has minor planchet flaws which show up through the mirroring of the coin.if his coin had these marks and I were grading it, it would be getting close to a sp60. Contact marks as such are graded more agressively on a SP
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
4911 Posts |
Quote:
If you put the OP's SP64 coin and my MS64 coin side by side there isn't that much difference in the contact marks on either coin. may I ask where you see the contact marks on my example? the fields are near flawless and so is the bust, this is obvious in my pics as well as the auction's images, there is planchet 'pitting' on the jaw but this is common to these coins as it was on the planchet before strike and does not affect the technical grade. Feel free to call me Will.
Edited by thedollarman
12/14/2016 4:05 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
All this and still no one congratulated me on being the only one to definitively say SP.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Quote:
may I ask where you see the contact marks on my example? the fields are near flawless and so is the bust, this is obvious in my pics as well as the auction's images, there is planchet 'pitting' on the jaw but this is common to these coins as it was on the planchet before strike and does not affect the technical grade. On the reverse the area's at between 10 o'clock and 1 o'clock at 3 o'clock 6 o'clock and between the canoe and the "19" of 1951, also under the "1" and between the D and the O in DOLLAR On the obverse there appears to be "cabinet rub" on the Kings Jaw and neck with marks below the neck. From the images the coin has the appearance of a failed "Touch Up". I don't know why you are in denial here, the coin only made SP64 So obviously it has some Issues or it would have graded higher  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4911 Posts |
i am not sure where you're seeing all these flaws, even with the crappy auction pics the coin does not appear to have anything notable going on..there are light scattered tones and stuff on the holder shown in the auction pics which is why I did not originally include them since the tones aren't even very noticeable in hand and since the stuff on the holder in those pics is a distraction and can cause confusion..like under the 1 and on the top obverse. Quote:
On the obverse there appears to be "cabinet rub" on the Kings Jaw and neck with marks below the neck.
From the images the coin has the appearance of a failed "Touch Up".
I don't know why you are in denial here, the coin only made SP64 So obviously it has some Issues or it would have graded higher  how many times have I explained what's up with the jaw now!? it is a remnant of the planchet production process which leaves a rough surface and a kind of pitted look, it is very common and doesn't effect the grade..I'm tired of repeating myself and now the coin appears to be the failed attempt of someone doctoring it!? also, I am not in denial here, I accept the 64 grade and agree with it..there are not many flaws to this coin, I represented that well in my own images...you're honestly not comprehending what I as well as others have been trying politely to explain so at this point I am done with my "denial". don't expect to hear much more from me in this thread.. Feel free to call me Will.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Why don't we just agree to disagree on this and just Move on  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1463 Posts |
A good healthy debate is great for learning. Thank you for sharing.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1461 Posts |
Many would disagree that PCGS/NGC over grades Specimen or PR coins. Probably the opposite. I would put both in the same category as Canadian copper where ICCS performance is bearable at best. Here is 1939 specimen ICCS SP 67. Highly unlikely this would make 67 at PCGS. 291966508226 |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4911 Posts |
@trout I can agree to that  @thecoinhunter  Feel free to call me Will.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Quote:
Many would disagree that PCGS/NGC over grades Specimen or PR coins. Probably the opposite. I would put both in the same category as Canadian copper where ICCS performance is bearable at best.
 I think that ICCS takes "Market acceptable" grading to new levels  |
| |
Replies: 58 / Views: 5,363 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 12/14/2016 1:00 pm
