Morgan Grading Question

General discussion board about VAMs, but no buy/sell offers
Post Reply
User avatar
raynat3
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 1:44 am

Morgan Grading Question

Post by raynat3 » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:59 pm

I was looking through ANA grading standards for Morgan’s and I did not see any mention of weak strike consideration.

I was wondering if any of the grading companies take into consideration weak strikes when grading? Does it matter if the date mm is typically weak compared to a date that is not typically weak?

I think I read at one time, certain VAMs in the 83-O series had a difficult time grading above 63 due to weak strikes.

User avatar
CascadeChris
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 10:41 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by CascadeChris » Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:16 pm

It used to be that a weak strike would limit a Morgan to 64 tops but in recent years they seem to be giving a bit of leeway and giving 5 & 6 gem grades to weak strikes. Think they're still limiting high gem tho unless it's just a hint of weakness or very typical for year/mint
Alonzi VW 2.0!

colwillys
Posts: 775
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:39 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by colwillys » Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:28 pm

Oh ya weak strike Morgan's get UP grade . Weak strike Peace get the down grade . ALL B S . Weak strike IS NOT the BEST strike . IT is OPP . Have you seen the light :idea: . Find the best and then pull the trigger .

RogerB
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2019 2:30 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by RogerB » Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:48 pm

Just to broaden the discussion a little, I’ll present the following thoughts.

1. All grades are deductions from MS-70, which is defined as “perfect as the coin comes from the dies.”
2. “Perfect from the dies” means only that the coin is without post-striking blemish, which also means that any defects of the dies or manufacture, are immaterial to the “grade.”
3. Deficient detail is a product of manufacture, and thus is immaterial to the “grade.”
4. Hence, the grade of a coin is a description only of post striking degradation, which makes the visibility of certain details irrelevant to accurate and reliable coin grading.

Peace dollar collectors routinely see this in grading of 1921 coins, where visible detail is ignored by all “grading companies.” But the same companies regularly apply the opposite to other coin types.

The best approach, to me and possibly to me alone, is that “grade” is a semi-empirical measure of condition and “strike” is a description of visible detail. Further, neither has any relation to “value,” “rarity,” or “desirability” – these are entirely individual opinions.

You are now returned to your regularly scheduled conversation. :)

User avatar
messydesk
Site Admin
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 1:57 am

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by messydesk » Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:01 pm

raynat3 wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:59 pm
I was wondering if any of the grading companies take into consideration weak strikes when grading? Does it matter if the date mm is typically weak compared to a date that is not typically weak?
Yes and yes. Coins with uncharacteristically weak strikes will be dinged for it, and seldom grade above 64, unless there is a separate designation for strike for that series (FBL, FH, etc.).

This calls into question why strike isn't a separate designation all types, but the market demand is for those designations only on certain types, so that's how the TPGs operate.
Welcome to the VAMWorld 2.0 discussion boards. R.I.P. old VAMWorld.

jgrinz
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 2:50 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by jgrinz » Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:26 pm

New Orleans coins are notorious for bad strikes but good ones can be found.
Does it limit its grade, certainly.
Image

User avatar
raynat3
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 1:44 am

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by raynat3 » Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:27 pm

Based on the comments what would you think this would grade?
443AB818-5556-438E-87BB-651C8B818F09.jpeg
443AB818-5556-438E-87BB-651C8B818F09.jpeg (293.64 KiB) Viewed 1015 times
C3F81F24-8F4F-469A-A5FB-EFC8E24C3ACE.jpeg
C3F81F24-8F4F-469A-A5FB-EFC8E24C3ACE.jpeg (289.57 KiB) Viewed 1015 times

colwillys
Posts: 775
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:39 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by colwillys » Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:53 pm

MS 61-62

User avatar
CascadeChris
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 10:41 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by CascadeChris » Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:40 am

If there isn't a bunch of small peppered chatter that is being light bleached and the fields + devices are that mark free, easy 6, probable 7 or even 7+.. Not 8 though, that mark below E•P alone would limit an 8 nomatter how pristine otherwise. That weakness, especially for an O mint, is a relative nothingburger in terms of grade assessment.

I think some light bleaching is obscuring some fine chatter though, especially on lower cheek/jaw dark area. If so it might limit it to a 4/5 depending on how much. I also see some minor abrasions around the eye.
Alonzi VW 2.0!

User avatar
alefzero
Posts: 339
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:33 pm
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by alefzero » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:24 am

Big bone of contention for me. I am intolerant of using strike in consideration of grade. That is market grading and is contrary to their independence. They try to defend the practice as though they are arbiters and market makers. Opens up a can of worms that some of them welcome. If they are going to assign grades that reflect valuation, then should they consider toning too? And some such measures fall in and out of favor. I think grade should begin with every coin a 70 as minted and let handling alone degrade it from there. Valuation ought to be left to the buyer and seller alone, with basic guide pricing be just that, a guide.

User avatar
messydesk
Site Admin
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 1:57 am

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by messydesk » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:41 am

raynat3 wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:27 pm
Based on the comments what would you think this would grade?
Looks quite clean, luster seems good, strike weak, so I'd say 64. Can't tell if there are little ticks and such from the photos, as they're a bit blurry.
Welcome to the VAMWorld 2.0 discussion boards. R.I.P. old VAMWorld.

jgrinz
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 2:50 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by jgrinz » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:21 pm

Though on quick look it looks like a really high grade coin.
Give it the once over and there are lot of detractors
Rim ding at 12 o'clock
Hit on Cap
Chatter around eye
Chatter in front of forehead
Hit below eye
Spot or stain in front of arrow feathers
That being said nice clashing and neck protrusion :-)
63-64 is my grade
Image

User avatar
messydesk
Site Admin
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 1:57 am

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by messydesk » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:02 pm

alefzero wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:24 am
Big bone of contention for me. I am intolerant of using strike in consideration of grade. That is market grading and is contrary to their independence. They try to defend the practice as though they are arbiters and market makers. Opens up a can of worms that some of them welcome. If they are going to assign grades that reflect valuation, then should they consider toning too? And some such measures fall in and out of favor. I think grade should begin with every coin a 70 as minted and let handling alone degrade it from there. Valuation ought to be left to the buyer and seller alone, with basic guide pricing be just that, a guide.
I don't entirely disagree with this, but bottom line is that TPGs are there to facilitate market activity, and whether they follow or define what the market wants, they really can't escape market grading. If this were a Mercury dime of Standing Liberty quarter, it could probably grade higher, since strike was at least partially, if not entirely, removed from the numeric grade of those types by virtue of there being a strike designation. As for considering toning in a grade, NGC does this with their star designation. I think if the TPGs could nail down what it means to score the toning, they'd do it, but that's much harder to quantify than other factors, so they leave it as a component of eye appeal, which is a component of the grade, and as such it can both positively and negatively affect the assigned grade.
Welcome to the VAMWorld 2.0 discussion boards. R.I.P. old VAMWorld.

vamsterdam
Posts: 774
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 2:48 am

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by vamsterdam » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:16 pm

Funny how mercury dimes, standing liberty quarters and jefferson nickels don’t take strike into account but morgans get hammered for the strike. If this were graded like a jefferson or mercury, it would grade at least 66. But since it is a morgan, i guess it can only grade 64. The marks are small and for the most part, are far from the prime focal points. Lustre looks good but kind of hard to tell on. A 2d photo.

collectinsince65
Posts: 659
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2019 12:55 am
Location: Florida

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by collectinsince65 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:18 pm

I'm going to jump in with MS 64 shot MS 65

User avatar
raynat3
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 1:44 am

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by raynat3 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:08 pm

I acquired this raw and the thing that stood out for me was how clean the fields are and the over all appearance. I thought surely a MS65. The first pictures were from my old iPhone and these are from my Nikon. Not sure if the second set is any better after reduction in size. Have always had trouble getting high quality full coin pics.

After again looking through the ANA verbiage for 65 I am not sure this coin meets the standard due to more than a few and more than minute marks in the prime focal areas.
RES_1883_O_V21A_rev.JPG
RES_1883_O_V21A_rev.JPG (558.08 KiB) Viewed 946 times
RES_1883_O_V21A_obv.JPG
RES_1883_O_V21A_obv.JPG (567.51 KiB) Viewed 946 times
I've seen much stronger obverse clashed 21A's but still like the overall look to this one though. Thanks for all the comments.

Shyatt01
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 3:50 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by Shyatt01 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:52 pm

1883-O is an excellent example. They are typically God awful strikes. I'm with John on this. Market grading is BS, but they do it. This is my 1883-O VAM 22A. It is PCGS MS63. I can live with the grade, thought I have plenty of PCGS MS64 coins in other years that aren't any nicer than this one.

However, I had to resubmit this twice to get the 63. Started out 62, broke it out and resubmitted, got a 61. Broke it out and resubmitted again, got the 63. (This was back before PCGS had facial recognition software for their coins :) ).

I think they also grade the high value Vams harder. I get the grade first, and THEN submit for the attribution.
Attachments
full obverse.jpg
full obverse.jpg (108.8 KiB) Viewed 938 times

User avatar
CascadeChris
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 10:41 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by CascadeChris » Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:06 pm

Ray, that's a SOLID 5. I've seen similar in 6 (low 6) and also in 4 (PQ 4) tho.. Just up to the day and who sees it etc.
Alonzi VW 2.0!

brotherlove
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:46 pm

Re: Morgan Grading Question

Post by brotherlove » Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:22 pm

The tics don't bother me as much as the weak strike. Two dimension I would lean MS64 with a shot at 65

Post Reply