It would be "GREAT" enough to get you top honors in the 1963 mint set catagory, even if you didn't have any of the other coins for the set.
I have been working hard trying to find the best affordable coins for my 1963 mint set and I have actually found a nice example of each coin in the set. I am currently ranked in the #2 spot as 100% complete. Nick Cascio has the honor of being ranked as #1, but his set is only 40% complete with only two GREAT dimes in MS67FT, and P & D quarters in MS66. I would not want to take anything away from Nick, but it seems to me that there should be some sort of penalty in the set score for not having the set complete. Maybe NGC should only award 40% of the total score for a 40% complete set. Then, when coins are added, the percentage would rise as well. 50% complete would equal 50% of the total score. Even with this penalty, Nick would still have top honors and it would be well deserved. But this would be fairer to other competitive collectors, and this would give Nick a good reason to continue building the set to stay ahead of everybody else. I am not collecting these coins to get recognition as the owner of the best set, but I'm not denying that would add to the thrill if I could brag a little. What do you people think?