| Author |
Replies: 43 / Views: 4,230 |
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
4849 Posts |
Quote: I have to agree with AG-3 in keeping with the theory that a strongly struck coin is graded more harshly. Fair enough, though I'm curious what makes you think this piece was "strongly struck"?
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
4849 Posts |
I am always looking at 1916s and came across this NGC VG8 example. Comparing it with mine, they are practically identical, mine even being a bit stronger in some areas. Only real difference is that the NGC one has a stronger date. it's so sad the difference that a "date" can make http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...TRK:MEWAX:IT
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
Don't worry about it heh, I think the graders were just asleep or something.
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
4849 Posts |
Well, second round at ANACS turned out at a G4 problem free! That's a fair enough grade for me to be content with.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3540 Posts |
LOL! Well...note to self, don't send two of the same in at once. Glad you submitted again.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1388 Posts |
at least you got that... It confuses me because some of the details are just so strong... You might have just confused the graders because of that. You are playing "stump the graders"  . Beautiful coin though, when or if you decide to ever sell it, they will receive a gem for the grade 
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
4849 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
273 Posts |
I think it's at least a G-6 coin, but problem free G-4 is a fair grade. They were way off with their AG-3 grade. Nicest looking AG SLQ I've ever seen.
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
4849 Posts |
Thanks canadanz! They really ding it at this grade level over the strength of the date. Though I don't totally agree with it, I do understand it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
Johnny, ANACS held it down the first time because of the wear on the date, I'm almost sure of it. Still, that date is legible, and, overall, the coin is in G condition, easy. To be honest, I don't know how any dates on these pre-1925s survive circulation for very long, anyway. There's no way they should be judged as strictly on that criteria as the others. Any clue to the date on these pre-1925s shouldn't peremptorily take that grade out of G.
Anyway, glad they fixed it for you.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2936 Posts |
This whole drill you've been through speaks volumes on the subjectivity of coin grading. I've sent my last coin to ANACS. The three times I submitted coins to them my returns have been full of surprises of the negative persuasion. My only good experience was getting a 1795 Flowing Hair Dollar back with a VG08 when ICG wouldn't grade it. I'm officially buying a box of bullets to bite and sending my babies to NGC from now on. 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
Paloeguy, I like NGC, too. Grading, as you pointed out, is subjective. The grading checkpoints or standards, however, are objective. This first grade on this SLQ is a prime example of having placed controlling emphasis on the single grading checkpoint or standard that says that you must only have wear on the upper part of the date, to go G. As this date has more wear on it than that, hence, they graded it AG. NGC will take a broader look at the entire coin, subjectively "weighing" those objective grading checkpoints and standards against each other, to arrive at their overall subjective grade. In other words, they'll follow the right process, at least. And, really, that's the best one can expect.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
182 Posts |
Johnny, glad to see they finally gave it a G4. It is a beautiful coin
|
| |
Replies: 43 / Views: 4,230 |