You Vs ICCS 1885 25 Cents

I would have guessed MS something.

ICCS should be ashamed.

I would have said MS-62, weakly struck.

The blemishes on the cheek are focal high points which would be the first area to shew wear; they are crisp and sharply defined.
On lower grades, the marks would be worn off and blend into the cheek. This would further indicate being weakly struck, thus the lack of expected detail.

p.s. This is under the assumption that the markings are raised and not depressed dents that I am seeing. If dents, then AU 50.

doug

Bummer. Can't see this at all.

ICCS penalizes the hair detail very hard when they are being conservative! I've owned large cents with roughly this much detail and trace red color that were graded VF-20 (and had no detracting comments).

Even at the VF level, it seems to be assumed that the crown details will be fully present and sharp, so the hair detail is crucial. You can see better what's missing when shown along side a sharper coin.

You could certainly argue that it's EF by todays more liberal standards, but to a true conservative grader it would never make AU.

I am not convinced that the mushiness (lack of detail) is due to wear. MS coins by definition are to be found exhibiting no wear. This coin does lack considerable detail normally found of MS's coins. But, I believe one can not be so quick as to rule out other possibilities. Less than MS indicated some degree of wear. Wear is normally uniform. I am perplexed that the obverse exhibits four clear markings on the cheek (in the throat area), and four dot-like markings to the left of the upper Lip (on-line with the left-section of the eye). Several clear crisp dots are on the Neck and two crisp clear dots are on the right ribbon. All of these markings are in areas of the coin which one habitually sees wear on less than MS states. The only explanitation for the pristineness of these markings not to exhibit wear is that they did not experience wear. Considering the extent of the lack of details found in other areas of the coin, these random markings should have been equally worn away. But this is not the case. The extensive 'wear' evident on the coin for a lower grade is not consistent the telltale evidence of the crispness of the random markings in mention. 'If' these markings are evidence of being an MS grade, then the only explaination is the coin was either underweight or not fully struck. Now the question becomes can weakly struck coins shewing no evidence of wear still be graded as MS. By definition, I believe so. And, I believe I may have just opened a bucket of worms...

Happy New Year.

doug

I read some where that some people seek out coins in ICCS holders and send them for re grading to PCGS and many times it comes back with a higher grade. Apparently ICCS doesn't take into affect luster and eye appeal.

Not only that...

When they realized that people would actually submit bullion coins (sometimes rolls at a time!) for grading, they truly had created a license to print money. The fact that they did this with coins that were fully intended to be valued based on their intrinsic worth just makes me laugh. I see now that you can buy "MS-70" 2018 silver Eagles at a set price over spot! Why buy a 2018 silver Eagle when, for only a 100%+ premium, I can be guaranteed a shiny new perfect MS-70 coin! Only $36.61 US per ounce of silver!