| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 3,179 |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2843 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7276 Posts |
With the slight wear on the ribbon, forehead and lower hair I'm at AU 55.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'll say AU-53, wouldn't argue with 55.
Edited by Coinfrog
10/20/2020 10:32 am
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
AU-58? John1  |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
I'll go with AU-58 . Coin has a lot going for itself but obvious wear on reverse rim and leaves . |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5670 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4680 Posts |
I'll say AU-55, possibly 58
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2843 Posts |
So, I get the general consensus here is an AU grade. Cracked from a MS62 holder. Not surprised.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
Quote:
Cracked from a MS62 holder. Not surprised. Buy the coin not the holder , How many times we've said this .  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I don't see this as a 62 coin, but now that it's cracked, I think you would be unlikely to see it in a similar TPG holder again. Given the discolored reverse, I'd value it at $20 tops. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
857 Posts |
Obvious wear on the obverse, splotchy patina on reverse. If you like it, that's all that matters, but if you were looking for a solid MS-62, then looking at the coin and disregarding what the holder says is what I would have done.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18663 Posts |
i had this one at MS62. an ugly 62 but still a 62
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5182 Posts |
With obvious wear (noted by many posters), why would ANACS have graded this as MS62? How on earth can it be mint state if there is any wear at all?
Edited by NumisEd
10/24/2020 2:59 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1217 Posts |
Very attractive Obverse to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
857 Posts |
Quote:
With obvious wear (noted by many posters), why would ANACS have graded this as MS62? How on earth can it be mint state if there is any wear at all? I'm still trying to figure that out. I know I find that with scarcer coins, such as Seated halves and dollars the TPGs seem to have a "habit" of grading slight, or even obvious wear as a 'weak strike'. That's why you'll see lots of circulated examples of scarcer type coins in MS-61, MS-62 and even MS-63 holders. However I personally have two problems with my hypothesis, that being that I find ANACS to be the strictest US TPG when it comes the AU-58 or MS-60 "flip", and the other being that this coin is hardly a scarce type, so why would they be so lenient on this one? It's not even a scarce date for the type.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18663 Posts |
Quote:
With obvious wear (noted by many posters), why would ANACS have graded this as MS62? How on earth can it be mint state if there is any wear at all? do not confuse weak strike areas with wear. in this case look at the reverse shield. no signs of wear at all especially on the perimeter. No wear on LIBERTY which is the highest device and would show any wear first. |
| |
Replies: 17 / Views: 3,179 |
Posted 10/20/2020 10:29 am
