| Author |
 Replies: 136 / Views: 10,857 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
This MY POINT OZ...when many see ear wear..It drops as supposed circulation...when in fact most MS63 coins have this same occurring feature...Also too, the other points must be considered.. But this AU slider, seems to be a way of discounting coins into the population. in other words....lets keep the numbers down so as not to upset the known number's(or value of the coins)....there are FAR to many graded coins by the top tier....who have given all these accepted nuances for grades to suddenly change the grading scale...if in fact this is true..then all PRECEDING GRADES ARE NOT TRUE.. But after $20 billion in observed acceptance in grades and attributions....can the old grades be accepted in today's grading eyes ? or better yet...Don't submitt or re-grade....one would loose.. better to pass the loos to some one else... One MUST remember the purpose of TPG's is to administer a grade that anyone can buy or sell and accept as truth without looking at it..... that is the purpose.....when the rules change...who is subject to the rules, and who wins or looses for the price difference....Even the holder must pay a price to regrade a coin that was already graded? and why? I'll stop here... AND GET BACK TO WHY WE ARE HERE......these points are what grading is all about, and why "one must learn" grading in our own eyes...NOT someone else's 60 second review... and what to look for......and as it has been mentioned...different years have different standards.. OK I will behave for a while... |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5631 Posts |
fenton states" Morgan, with all due respect I believe you are confusing strike weakness with wear. A coin which has seen enough circulation to wear down a sharply struck hairline flat is going to have most of it's luster obliterated and obvious wear all over high points of the reverse. For that 1901, reverse and luster are very strong."
I see your valid point, However if you look at the coin, the strike on the obverse is strong and still shows SOME WEAR on the higher spots, and the reverse ALSO exhibits a strong strike and shows wear ,talons, the breast feathers are worn and the over all coin still shows it's luster.
My opinion is the coin has been circulated and shows some wear, on the reverse as well as the obverse, I do not agree the coins luster would be removed, with this amount of wear, as you state, check out the reverse wear, it is there, and so is the original luster. hence the MS 63 grade...IMO..
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
Beautiful 1901-O bio..... and even more importantly in a thread like this one, beautiful images..... I'm sure that everyone here knows what they are looking for and can at least to some extent judge the other coins posted as well, but I wonder if the other coins were imaged as that 1901-O is, that there might be more comments rather than just photos. The only thing that might interest me about these comparisons is if they are are made with mint, year and TPG all being considered. Could three 1901-O coins (one from each TPG) be compared with any conclusion? Could 1901 (one from each mint from the same TPG) draw another conclusion? Are all Morgans so similar that year, mint, and TPG are irrelevant? Is the time window in a TPG's evolution yet another factor for consideration? This all seems very complicated and potentially frustrating to me. |
|
Pillar of the Community
2224 Posts |
This is all quite subjective to me and I am still very new to any attempt at grading. I agree with many of the former comments. I can't compare a New Orleans mint MS with a San Fransico MS 63 without considering their mint striking quality. The other variable being year of the coin. I always do comparisons with like kind coins. I confess I also consider luster and blemishes. I personally do not care for tone. Nothing against tone. This is all IMHO.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
I am gonna go ahead and jump in here and say not all year/mm of the Morgan series are equal in strike But on every one of them if there is any wear on the coin anywhere it can not be called Uncirculated. That would defeat the term of it being Uncirculated. This is where you need to know your series well and know the differences between wear and a weak strike because it is very hard to tell the difference when just looking at the details of the coin, that is why you look at luster and every other factor on the Morgan series. Wear will break the luster where a weak strike will not and experience is the only way to be able to differentiate the two
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5631 Posts |
Zee, AS usual some very insightful observations.
I DO believe a comparison CAN be made for the grade, from ANY mint, sure one would have to take into consideration the Year, Mint, etc, BUT it can be done with some level of certainty and degree of accuracy. I also believe Zee pointed out some very interesting areas where some could believe, with some degree of certainty, the answers to those questions, COULD be obtained.
southsav, I have been inspecting your 1878-CC coin, I DO NOT know why, from the photos,Which IMO, could be more detail oriented, as far as clarity and less glare, the coin did not come back with an MS 64 grade, I believe the strike is strong, the details are borderline 63+,64 but IMO, I would of also thought the 64 grade was expected. It just is more food for thought as to the point of this topic, the subjective nature of one's perspective opinions is NOT a written in stone fact.......
I see from others the point of grading Morgans from differing years and mints is or has been discussed, I would propose for the "level playing field effect", that we consider grading the same year coins to start, this IS not my belief that it can not be done as a mixture, just I would suggest doing so to keep those of that opinion open-minded.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
One thing that must be remembered, that the TPG's have tightend there belt..As Oz explained it to me, If its not a half point stronger that the expected grade, it will not make the grade expected, my meaning is it takes an MS63+ grade coin to make MS63. not use why, but that's(PCGS) how its being done.. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5631 Posts |
Bryan, I see you have stated the obvious, however to me I am NOW pondering the thought that every coin posted here is obviously circulated, meaning I see a level of wear on every coin, I do not understand the TPG'S grades at times and NOW I am even more confused. I wanted to ask your opinion, on the grade of the 1901-O, also do you see or consider the coin to have ANY wear.I see wear and according to the ANA'S standards wear equals circulated..........Thanks. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
1901-0 VAM 25 slant date, polishing lines in the 3 leaves left of the Tail feathers and below talon and arrow feathers and between the neck and wing....I agree with your point Mike, yet how many coins, for decades have these same "circulated" marks yet grade MS Quality? And the supposed number of bag marks define the MS grade....The 1901-0 has very nice OBV fields,the REV has more chatter.. Indications of WEAR or of bag marks? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5631 Posts |
Something is very wrong!!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Morgans were minted by the millions. You cannot draw conclusions from one coin as to the strike quality of another when as many as 90 die pairs were in use for that year/mint, on half a dozen different presses each requiring their own setup.
Every Morgan must be evaluated independently based upon it's own characteristics, and your knowledge of the differences between strike and wear. If there is a more difficult series to grade, I'm unaware of it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
I can agree with that Dave. Yet one ponders the visual observations to those which are in the written descriptions of what a grade level should be...Its not a rocket science. but not exactly something one can ultimately pinpoint without variances..
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5631 Posts |
Dave, I could NOT agree more with your statement, " Every Morgan must be evaluated independently based upon it's own characteristics, and your knowledge of the differences between strike and wear." I am looking for an opinion from Bryan or yourself, in your opinion does the 1901-O Morgan, show wear and if so, is it NOT considered a circulated coin. I know the difference between strike weakness and wear, check the coin over well. Please.......  I ask this of either or both because of the combined experience you both have. I very much look forward to these answers.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
I'm still learning so I also eagerly await some detailed analysis on that 1901
|
| |
Replies: 136 / Views: 10,857 |
First Page
Posted 01/09/2011 12:01 pm
