The finer points of grading USA Indian cents

[bobh]

Can someone please further my education by explaining why these coins were graded the way they are? All are from the upcoming Heritage FUN auction in Tampa, FL in January:

 

1. 1909-S Indian Cent (PCGS VG-10)

2. 1909-S Indian Cent (PCGS F-12)

3. 1909-S Indian Cent (PCGS F-15)

 

For this rare date/mm combination, there is still only a marginal difference of about $20 in retail price between these grades. But with 1877, the key date, there is a big markup in price between VG and F. I can see many more details in the F-15 coin than in either of the other two. But I would hesitate to grade coins 1 or 2 differently if I saw them side by side.

 

I'm sure some people would grade all three of these only VG!

 

Here is an 1877 cent I bought recently. It was purchased raw, and I am trying to decide on an adequate grade for it:

 

 

Comparing it to the coins in the Heritage auction, I'd have to say F-15 (some people might even say borderline VF, but that would be stretching it too far). I would be very disappointed if it graded only VG. I don't think it has been cleaned in the past, although one never knows sometimes...

 

What do you think?

[thedeadpoint]

Oh jeez. I haven't seriously considered a coin with this much wear in a long time. Umm...Generally, I like to see "LIBERTY" for it to be XF. Since its visible but weak, I'll go with F

[Saor Alba]

Maybe it is my eyes, but I see more details in the "Liberty" on the VG-10 PCGS coin than I do on the F-12 NGC coin. But my opinion of NGC is somewhat less than favourable. I would suggest looking at the NGC graded Swiss shooting thalers from the late 19th century on a certain Boston area dealer's website - obvious cleanings, wear patterns etc, but NGC grades them as AU etc and doesn't code 92 them like PCGS would.

 

Grading IHC's is generally but not always easier than grading Lincoln cents. For one thing, and most importantly - striking pressure remained fairly consistent during the tenure they were minted. I have known since I was a kid about grading the lower mids based on the Liberty - the remaining lettres are the key. Obviously betwixt the two grading companies there is some degree of deviation of opin regarding what constitutes a certain grade.

 

Frankly, if I had to have a coin from this, I would take the VG-10 Piece as it couples a better value for the grade, with more accuracy in grading on the TPG holder. But then again, I am a buy the coin not the fraking plastic sort of a person, and am known to crack coins out of holders and putting them in capsules - have a Portuguese Escudo from 1916 on my way that is going to be a cracker out coin.

[SMS]

Although the TPGs grade using a form of grading that is akin to the ANA Guidelines, much higher regard to market conditions and acceptability (market grading) is considered in their grading than the technical aspects of the coin's condition. Because of this, over time, it would appear that their "standards" change, when in fact, it is the market that changes. I would not grade any of the coins linked as better than VG. Taking a technical stance, LIBERTY must be clear on each of those coins. Using the photos linked, I can only make out a partial LIBERTY. On each of the coins, LIBERTY seems to be worn down on the bottom, making them only partial, not clear letters. On a VG coin, LIBERTY should have at least three "clear" letters, or two "clear" letters and two partial letters. There is no technical reason to raise the grade when there are two or three "clear" letters, and the rest partial. This is pure market speculation - raising the grade because the market may accept the coin at that price/value.

 

Surprisingly, the PCGS coin appears to be properly graded in this instance. The two NGC coins are apparently overgraded. However, this is based on a sight-unseen analysis. The coin can never truly be "sight-seen" considered until it is physically in hand.

 

Looking at your 1877, I would call it Fine. In a Typical VF graded coin, you do not need to have a sharp LIBERTY (that is for a Choice VF), thus the details on your obverse would call for a consideration of possibly Typical VF (VF20). However, based on your photos, I do not see enough detail in the reverse leaves to warrant a VF. The apparent smoothing of the N in ONE helps to tip the scale toward a Fine, for me, as it shows me that what I am seeing as apparent wear on the details on the leaves is in fact true and not just a play of light.

 

However, for the sole reason that the coin is a key date, the TPGs will push it to VF and disregard the reverse because the current market will accept higher money for the coin than the typical Fine. I would not accept it as such, but that's what makes grading coins a subjective matter...everyone has their own opinion.

[bobh]

oops ... just realized that not all were in PCGS holders! I think I need to study more of the auction listings now.

 

Thanks for the comments, everyone!

[bobh]

However, based on your photos, I do not see enough detail in the reverse leaves to warrant a VF. The apparent smoothing of the N in ONE helps to tip the scale toward a Fine, for me, as it shows me that what I am seeing as apparent wear on the details on the leaves is in fact true and not just a play of light.

Thanks for the feedback!

 

As to the reverse, the N in ONE is the shallow N typical for this date (and many other dates within that decade). It is weakly struck, as opposed to having excessive wear. Proof 1877's all have bold N's, according to the book written by Rick Snow. It was one of the first things I looked for when I first saw the coin because it is one of the main indications that it is genuine. The others were the typical "sagging 7" of the last 7 in the date and the weakness of strike at 10-11 o'clock on the obverse (the weak denticles in particular).

[Art]

I'd grade all three as VG at the most. The first VG10 is the most pleasing of all the coins, IMHO.

[Saor Alba]

I'd grade all three as VG at the most. The first VG10 is the most pleasing of all the coins, IMHO.

 

 

I am glad others concur with my opin.