MS 63 ?

[ozjohn]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1908-Great-Britain-1-2-Crown-NGC-MS-63/312893723770?hash=item48d9eb547a:g:IZYAAOSwZQ9d-C7W

Not sure this offering makes the grade of  MS 63. As I have said before the strength of TPGing should be accuracy and consistency which they fail to achieve sometimes

Edited December 17, 2019 by ozjohn
More info

[Paddy]

Not sure that one would even make VF on the UK scale - maybe XF Sheldon?

"Sometimes" failing to achieve accuracy is somehow more damning than never achieving it!

[ozjohn]

I couldn't agree more. Here's my one that I obtained from Colin Cooke. It was graded at EF but I think it's a tad better and I paid GBP 425 which I think was a fair price. Perhaps I should have it TPG ed.

[Paddy]

Most of my Ed VII Half Crowns are well down on that grade as I have collected them "on the cheap" from job lots. Here is the best I have:

 

[azda]

Speaking of accuracy and TPGs, these next 2 coins come from a well known dealer, both have technical grades yet both are ex mounts, I just wonder if these bigger dealers get some sort of preferential treatment, the mount marks are quite clearly visible but yet no details grades for being ex mounts. The mounts that holds the coin in place in the holder actually cover the fact these were ex mounts, only in the true view of PCGS are these visible

Edited December 17, 2019 by azda

[azda]

[1949threepence]

14 hours ago, ozjohn said:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1908-Great-Britain-1-2-Crown-NGC-MS-63/312893723770?hash=item48d9eb547a:g:IZYAAOSwZQ9d-C7W

Not sure this offering makes the grade of  MS 63. As I have said before the strength of TPGing should be accuracy and consistency which they fail to achieve sometimes

Can't see it now.

[Paulus]

46 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Can't see it now.

It's still there, you need to copy/paste the full URL rather than click on the link

I must say it's one of the worst cases of over-grading by a top TPG I have seen

[Michael-Roo]

[Sword]

The strike is so weak that even the chin is gone!

[Peckris 2]

6 minutes ago, Sword said:

The strike is so weak that even the chin is gone!

Is it the age-old problem of trying to photograph through a slab?

[Paulus]

29 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

Is it the age-old problem of trying to photograph through a slab?

It will lose some detail especially with a poor camera setup but the ear for example, no way is it MS63, just silly

[1949threepence]

The way it looks through the slab is no more than F/GF, rather than UNC. Maybe the grader was very inexperienced.

[1949threepence]

1 hour ago, Paulus said:

It's still there, you need to copy/paste the full URL rather than click on the link

I must say it's one of the worst cases of over-grading by a top TPG I have seen

Ah yes, I see. Thanks.

[Peckris 2]

12 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

The way it looks through the slab is no more than F/GF, rather than UNC. Maybe the grader was very inexperienced.

I just can't see it. The lion faces are all there! Ok I wouldn't put it higher than EF but F/GF?

[1949threepence]

19 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

I just can't see it. The lion faces are all there! Ok I wouldn't put it higher than EF but F/GF?

Paddy's above is uncirculated. Ozjohn's is about GEF.

But with the coin in question, I can't see any hair detail at all. Also there's some flattening of the lions - especially the rampant lion's mane. No evidence of even residual lustre.

Sorry, but it's not even VF for me. Maybe it might look different out of the slab, but on current evidence...... 

Edited December 17, 2019 by 1949threepence

[JLS]

Could just be an excessively weak strike with lustrous surfaces ? There do seem to be some obvious signs of wear on the reverse. 

Definitely not the first sub-EF coin I've seen in a MS63 slab though. Although they slab vast numbers of pieces so some things like this are almost unavoidable. 

[ozjohn]

3 hours ago, JLS said:

. Could just be an excessively weak strike with lustrous surfaces ? There do seem to be some obvious signs of wear on the reverse. 

Definitely not the first sub-EF coin I've seen in a MS63 slab though. Although they slab vast numbers of pieces so some things like this are almost unavoidable. 

It may be worth looking at the NGC site which has a video which takes you thru their grading process. Assuming they follow their process mistakes in grading should not happen. The coin is independently graded by at least 2 professional graders .

The wellbeing of encapsulated coins has also been an issue on these forums. I pointed out at the time that  coins were handled by the graders without any protection and also noticed on looking at their video the person encapsulating the coins was not waring gloves either  although I did not see the operator touching the coins as they had already been mounted. However I would not be surprised if the coins were mounted in their formers by unprotected hands given NGS's earlier practice.

As for difficulty in photographing encapsulated coins I agree but IMO the NGC product seems to have a more transparent holder than PGCS  and should be easierto photograph. Of course this may be due to the white background of the NGC holder.

Edited December 18, 2019 by ozjohn

[ozjohn]

Sorry "waring" typo should be wearing.

Edited December 18, 2019 by ozjohn

[Diaconis]

49 minutes ago, ozjohn said:

Sorry "waring" typo should be wearing.

Waring wearing a hat

[Sword]

13 hours ago, JLS said:

Could just be an excessively weak strike with lustrous surfaces ?

I think that's probably what the graders were thinking on this occasion. But NGC's definition of MS63 is "Slightly weak or average strike". The strike appear to be terrible rather than just "slightly" weak. (The official NGC photos are similar but the ear looks better.)

[VickySilver]

Not a coin that I would want, however if top MS grade - 70 - reflects how close the coin is to the state in which it left the dies, then it could be a "technical" 63 in that there is little actual wear. In other words, not far how off it left the dies. Again, best seen in hand with the above caveat which is why the coin should be purchased and not the holder even if it may be accurate.

[Sword]

6 minutes ago, VickySilver said:

Not a coin that I would want, however if top MS grade - 70 - reflects how close the coin is to the state in which it left the dies, then it could be a "technical" 63 in that there is little actual wear. In other words, not far how off it left the dies. Again, best seen in hand with the above caveat which is why the coin should be purchased and not the holder even if it may be accurate.

Would be nice if PCGS and NGC would actually use the term "technical MS" in their grading. "Technical" meaning you must look at the coin in hand or you will be in for a surprise. 

[Sword]

9 hours ago, ozjohn said:

As for difficulty in photographing encapsulated coins I agree but IMO the NGC product seems to have a more transparent holder than PGCS  and should be easier to photograph. Of course this may be due to the white background of the NGC holder.

I also think that NGC holders are easier to photograph than other TPGs (but admittedly have only done it a few times). 

For example, I had no problem getting photos of my 1902 halfcrown in NGC holder.

 

[ozjohn]

8 hours ago, VickySilver said:

Not a coin that I would want, however if top MS grade - 70 - reflects how close the coin is to the state in which it left the dies, then it could be a "technical" 63 in that there is little actual wear. In other words, not far how off it left the dies. Again, best seen in hand with the above caveat which is why the coin should be purchased and not the holder even if it may be accurate.

Depends upon if you adopt a top down or bottom up approach. To quote  NGC MS.  Weak or average strike with no trace of wear. Numerous abrasion, hairlines and/or large marks. IMO this coin fails on the wear criteria. In general not many  UNC coins achieve a greater than MS 64 grading with most lower. IMO the inconsistency in grading applies to all TPGs. 

Edited December 18, 2019 by ozjohn