| Author |
 Replies: 89 / Views: 8,627 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
719 Posts |
OP here Quote:
What about it? One is an S mint the other is a P mint. Both can certainly be an F unless you are just going by pure technical grading which hasn't been done in a long long time though some people still choose to use it for their own tastes. That's fine if they want to grade only technically, but they need to understand how their grading differs.
As I said already one of those could easily be a net grade anyway and until someone gets them in hand we won't know from those pictures alone. I 'made' these coins (found raw and sent to PCGS), so I, the OP have had them in hand, raw and slabbed. The photos are an accurate representation. I've bought a lot of coins from photos and scans. These coins have as original surfaces as one can determine without being the original owner. Pocket pieces tone differently depending upon storage conditions and how recently they were carried. Obviously, I'm not sending to you for inspection, and I don't believe you are correct re: "net grading" cleanings and circulated commems. Do you have experience in this area? 2. P and S mint makes no difference in this series, unless you know otherwise. I've looked at a lot of these. Probably my favorite design in the series I wrote a LOT about market and technical grading by PCGS, the Registry, lowball coins, cleaning, logic, Ad hominem, etc etc and erased it in the spirit of TL;DR My fellow circ commem collectors know the deal. It's alright the debate turned to the one sarcastic, unverifiable comment (how many graders/time spent) vs. the two coins in question not being the same grade - that is fine. It can keep going. One comment though, unless you master the ad hominem (and non sequitur), you will have a tough time succeeding as an American politician. Sadly, not joking. Carry on  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10047 Posts |
Quote:
One comment though, unless you master the ad hominem (and non sequitur), you will have a tough time succeeding as an American politician. Sadly, not joking. Absolutely true and, as you said, sad. IMO this mindset of abandoning reason in favor of using an emotional steam valve is one of the worst for killing anything that could be a good outcome or result in any situation. Having worked with high schoolers most of my life, I was used to pointing out the ad hominem mindset's fallacies all the time. In the right tone of voice and with a legitimately caring attitude towards them, most high schoolers can understand when you say "please grow up and use your intelligence, not your emotions." How much squash could a Sasquatch squash if a Sasquatch would squash squash? Download and read: Grading the graders Costly TPG ineptitude and No FG Kennedy halveshttps://ln5.sync.com/dl/7ca91bdd0/w...i3b-rbj9fir2 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5838 Posts |
Not all MS 65 coins are graded equal, so the fact is true to not all F-15 coins are the same.
See which one can get a CAC green bean, or a gold bean. LOL!
I am glad I read this post, thanks Earle42 for ad hominem definition, learn something new every day.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
Do you have experience in this area?
2. P and S mint makes no difference in this series, unless you know otherwise Yes I do. I got pretty far into a set and have sent in quite a few of the VGs and lower before moving other pursuits. From the pictures the one with more detail looks like it was knocked down from VF for negative eye appeal which they do quite regularly. Different mints ALWAYS makes a difference in the classic coins, they did not strike or produce to the same quality year in year out in every series. Morgans are a great example of this on the more extreme side. It doesn't make as much of a difference now with the moderns Quote:
It's alright the debate turned to the one sarcastic, unverifiable comment (how many graders/time spent) vs. the two coins in question not being the same grade - that is fine. The only reason that happened is because people decided to go off on a long tangent challenging the correction. You may have been sarcastic and posters may have known that but people reading may not which is why I corrected it and will always correct those type comments if I see it. If some people want to try and turn me into the bad guy for doing so that's fine, doesn't make any difference to me nor will anything posted make any difference to the TPGs. I'm not worried about changing the mind of them. The TPGs will continue to grown and capture more of the US and world markets as they have done so for the past several decades regardless of anything that's posted. Who it could make a difference too though is an individual collector and it would be a shame for someone to make their decisions based off of someone convincing them they're a fraud/conspiracy Edited by basebal21
07/07/2018 5:31 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
First, let me state I am not affiliated with any third party coin grading company. I am not trying to advertise for them or anything like that at all. Quote:
And yes, when facts and contact info are being posted, locking is the best way to hide it so others won't see it. Earle42, I have absolutely no motivation to "hide" facts and contact information. What makes you think I want to hide contact info and facts? I believe that the TPGs can be trusted often to accurately grade a coin. This does NOT mean, however, that one should purchase a coin just because a TPG thought it was a certain grade. Use your own judgement and look at the coin yourself. Do you think that the coin appears to be accurately graded by the TPG and is priced right? Or are you buying it based off the TPG grade alone? What I'm saying is that you should not blindly trust a TPG grade. Third party grading services are useful and will remain in the coin collecting hobby. Their grades can usually be relied on. However, don't buy a coin purely because it was graded at a certain grade by a TPG. To answer the original question, I still believe that classic US commems are not PCGS's "strength." However, Baseball could be correct about this as well. Edited by SilverDollar2017
07/07/2018 6:53 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10047 Posts |
@silverdollar. I humbly apologize to you b/c I see how, after having just re-reading that area of the thread, my post could be taken as a personal statement directed at you for saying to lock the thread. I did not mean it to be that way. My thoughts at the time were the fact that in the past locking the thread has happened after verifiable facts had been posted and rebutted without any sources being cited. I am thankful this thread was allowed to go as it did so people could read, see the facts, and have more information from which to draw their own conclusions. The ideas you have stated are what I wish more new collectors understood before blindly being taken in by marketing and ebay trends. I believe there are a lot of newbies wasting money on senseless submissions b/c people not resdearching for themselves can believe grading is an essential part of the coin hobby... a knee jerk response when finding what they think is s nice coin. I want to again make it very clear. If someone likes slabbed coins and enjoys them, this is great b/c it gives them enjoyment. To collect slabbed coins is not a "right" or "wrong." Even the illegitimate labels (like First Strike) put on coins just to market more product look nice if a set of them is displayed together. I just hate to see when someone is hoodwinked into believing (using this example) they actually have a first strike coin. How much squash could a Sasquatch squash if a Sasquatch would squash squash? Download and read: Grading the graders Costly TPG ineptitude and No FG Kennedy halveshttps://ln5.sync.com/dl/7ca91bdd0/w...i3b-rbj9fir2Edited by Earle42
07/08/2018 12:53 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
Quote:
I humbly apologize to you b/c I see how, after having just re-reading that area of the thread, my post could be taken as a personal statement directed at you for saying to lock the thread.
I did not mean it to be that way. My thoughts at the time were the fact that in the past locking the thread has happened after verifiable facts had been posted and rebutted without any sources being cited. That's fine.  I just didn't want this thread to start getting too far off topic. I am glad this thread has remained civilized and therefore was not locked. We all can learn about TPGs and understand both viewpoints from this thread. |
|
Forum Dad
 United States
24182 Posts |
Quote:
And yes, when facts and contact info are being posted, locking is the best way to hide it so others won't see it. Just FYI, locking a topic hides nothing. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
719 Posts |
Quote:
Yes I do. I got pretty far into a set and have sent in quite a few of the VGs and lower before moving other pursuits. From the pictures the one with more detail looks like it was knocked down from VF for negative eye appeal which they do quite regularly.
Different mints ALWAYS makes a difference in the classic coins, they did not strike or produce to the same quality year in year out in every series. Morgans are a great example of this on the more extreme side. It doesn't make as much of a difference now with the moderns Please share the difference in the P and S mint for 1926 Oregon. Reference citations and your photos of examples would be helpful re: strike, planchets, die states, etc. For example, I'm a Barber Half collector primarily and the middle year O mint coins are notorious for weak strikes. Finding well struck coins command a premium. Everyone knows this. PCGS knows this in their grading. I've never read anything about 26 P and S Oregons and such issues. If you think PCGS takes 'eye appeal' into account in grading for circulated, especially lowball coins, in this series, I just don't know what to say. You are certainly entitled to your opinion on eye appeal. No point arguing if chocolate or vanilla taste 'better.' To say that the 1926 P got dinged for eye appeal, I'm thinking you represent <10% of the commem lowball community here. Opinions from nickelsearcher, notmintobe, logpotato, and several others whose usernames I can't recall would be welcome. I certainly agree PCGS market grades > technical grades a lot of times. But they get VERY TECHNICAL with AG3 vs G4 1916 D Mercury dimes, 1916 SLQ, 1901 S Barber quarters, 1909 S VDB LWC and many other classic key dates, and even in higher grades G-XF. Again, they do not downgrade shiny, polished looked or dipped coins, even with hairlines. They quite often UPGRADE them or straight grade them. Did you see the Pan Pac above? You see my sig line. I love PCGS for authenticating coins as legit, and overall they are usually pretty close to their technical grades in circulated coins. I have no idea re the high MS market as it seems way more subjective than objective. It also gets very subjective in single date early commems like Stone Mtn, Hugo, Monroe, etc. when determining a PO1. You know, there always could be 'just a little more wear' before basal state. But they don't treat key date coins that way it has to be ALL THERE, BOTH SIDES to get the higher grade- and the double standard irks me more than just a flat out miss on these 2 Oregons. 26 P is VF and 26 S is VG. No biggie in the long run, though. The individual graders just don't have the experience. They look at a zillion moderns hoping for that MS70 >>>> lowballers shooting for that PO1. I am interested in your anecdotal experience with these Oregons and anything you can back it up with (sources, pics, etc.) besides mere opinion. Thanks for posting. Always willing to learn and hear/see others' experience. edit for typos in this long post Edited by two_tonevf35
07/08/2018 3:54 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
If you think PCGS takes 'eye appeal' into account in grading for circulated, especially lowball coins, in this series, I just don't know what to say. Eye appeal is a part of every grade, they mention it in their grading standards and grading videos on youtube and their website. The closer to P0-01 it gets you can argue it matters less, but it absolutely natters on VG and up which the coins you posted both are. Even Po-01 it matters in the extent that a really ugly one is probably getting details graded from damage or fake wear ect. We both know that back when those were graded it was a bit of a "feelings" game for the circulated commems grade. That can certainly explain some of the discrepancy, but I can see that there may be am alternative explanation or more to it than just they were feeling out where they wanted to put the grading on them. The reason why I think it may have been an eye appeal issue on the P is the staining around the design with the lighter fields. That's usually not a look they like from what I've seen before whereas the S has a pleasing look from the picture. Quote:
But they get VERY TECHNICAL with AG3 vs G4 1916 D Mercury Dimes They are for the 16 D in my opinion as they almost always have a pretty generic look to them in those grades, but with that said you can certainly find ones graded AG that people will say should be a G that was held back. Quote:1916 SLQ, 1901 S Barber quarters, 1909 S VDB LWC and many other classic key dates, and even in higher grades G-XF. No one ever said they ignore technical grading, that is of course an important part of the grade. That said there is a lot more to a grade than just how much rub or how many marks a coin has which is what confuses some people. People also get confused about the eye appeal aspect. Positive eye appeal won't turn an F into an XF and vice versa. What it can do and does do though is turn that VF into an F or a strong F into a low VF or a strong VG into an F ect. It can move the grade it just won't have wild swings. Quote:
Again, they do not downgrade shiny, polished looked or dipped coins, even with hairlines. They quite often UPGRADE them or straight grade them No idea what you're talking about at all here. They details polished coins. Dipping is perfectly fine and is undetectable when done right so not sure why you included that there. Quote:
But they don't treat key date coins that way it has to be ALL THERE, BOTH SIDES to get the higher grade- and the double standard irks me more than just a flat out miss on these 2 Oregons. Keys do get graded on their own standard that is very true. Also agreed they are super tight on Keys in higher grades, but it's because of the value jumps. They're real tight around all big value jumps in grades and when the next grade up is a four figure increase you will basically never get the benefit of the doubt there when it comes to grades. It can absolutely be frustrating as a submitter but I fully understand why. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
719 Posts |
@basebal21 thank you for all your insights and time to respond above, and if you ever find any information on the 26P vs 26S (and other Oregon dates) I'm sure classic commem collectors in all grades would be interested. And on that note, I will stop  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12477 Posts |
Quote:
Keys do get graded on their own standard that is very true. Why? In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020
In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020
In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
683 Posts |
Quote:
.Why? I to ask why? I have noticed whilst browsing pop reports (with true view) that a lot of top pop key date/variety coins seem... Optimistically graded to say the least. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
Why? Rarity/quality issues for most, value for others. You see it more in the barber series and earlier. There are some truly rare keys before then where you would see astronomical prices for some of them if they were graded the same way a common date is. They may be more lenient not to details a lower graded one to prevent most of them from being details, but they're harder on the keys in higher grades due to the big value jumps. For example an 1881-S Morgans value doesn't really change from a 63 to 64 but an 1889 CC has a huge value jump from 63 to 64. Using those same two an 1881-s from 64 to 65 is a small jump in value comparatively, but the 1889-CC from 64 to 65 turns into the value of a house. Those types of jumps cause them to hold harder lines at certain grades with the keys |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12477 Posts |
Quote:
Those types of jumps cause them to hold harder lines at certain grades with the keys I don't see the justification. You actually just gave credence to the point that coins, like worn commems, are given a cursory glance of a grade because they don't fit into a high-dollar category. What you suggest is that TPGs are biased in their grading in favor of super high value coins. That's seems completely plausible, but deplorable. Coins don't care what date/mm they have. Graders must treat them as any other. Otherwise, there exists too much bias, spin and, ultimately, collusion. A Key Date is made the same way as a "normal" coin.In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020
In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020
In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024
Edited by spru
07/09/2018 04:02 am
|
| |
Replies: 89 / Views: 8,627 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 07/07/2018 2:42 pm
