lehigh96

When you have a coin professionally graded, is there a correct grade or does the coin have a correct "grade range?" And if a coin has a correct grade range, then it is entirely possible to submit the same coin more than once, have the coin receive different grades, and both grades be correct. What I am talking about is the inherent subjectivity in grading colliding with incremental grading. We have all done it. You look at a coin and you simply can't decide if the coin is gem grade (MS65) or just miss gem (MS64+), and your might change your mind depending upon how you view the coin, lighting, magnification. In this example, the incremental grade range might be MS64.7 to MS65.2. Depending upon who the graders are at the time of grading, the coin can grade either MS64+ or MS65, and both grades are correct.

Yeah, no way it could be a modern counting machine, I'm thinking something from the late 1800's or early 1900's that required manual manipulation rather than electricity.

The marks on the chin (blue circle by Jason) look to be indentations that appear to be evenly spaced in a pattern with a flat top edge and a rounded at the bottom of each mark. I don't know what caused it, but it seems to be either the coin was stamped with something or grabbed and moved by something that had protruding bumps like on a conveyer belt. Perhaps some sort of old time coin counting machine used in banks or casinos for slot machines. The marks in the field below the chin (green circle by Jason) are much finer and not in any pattern and don't look like bag marks. Looks like someone shot it with a really tiny shotgun. I have no idea what caused these marks.

Ali, I know what the website says, which is why I asked the question. And since you brought it up, I am a two time winner of the "Best Presented Set" Award, where is my money? I didn't get a monetary award either time I won that award, so either the Best Presented Set doesn't include a monetary award, or you guys just don't like me. At this point I would like to change my question, here it goes. Since the Best Presented Set award doesn't include a monetary award, why is there a 75% requirement that coins be in NGC plastic?

I don't think my initial question was clear enough. NGC requires that in order for a set to qualify for a major award category, the set needs to be comprised of at least 75% NGC graded coins. My question is related specifically to the Best Presented Set category. Since the Best Presented Set is based upon the photos and descriptions provided by the registry participant, why should it matter if the coins are in NGC or PCGS plastic? FYI, I took the following quote from the NGC Registry Award page: "At least 75% of the coins registered to a set must be NGC-certified for the set to be eligible for the Major Awards listed above."

I have to say that I made a submission to both PCGS and NGC in the last month. In both cases, there were coins that the TPGs thought were in need of restoration. The two NGC coins were rainbow toned proof Jefferson Nickels plucked from cello proof set packaging. Don't ask me why NGC wanted me to remove the toning as both coins were beautiful, but they sent me an e-mail giving me 24 hours to respond if I wanted to complete the restoration process through NCS at a price of $25 per coin. PCGS on the other hand, bodybagged my coin and sent it back to me with a sticker on the back recommending that I use their restoration service. Obviously I am in favor of the way that NGC handles the situation.

I agree with you, and if they wanted to bodybag/reject coins for intentional damage, they could easily do so. You were the one who said they didn't have that option. Perhaps as a grader working for the TPG, you don't currently have that option, but that doesn't mean the TPG couldn't revise their policy anytime they want.

Can sets comprised mostly of PCGS graded coins compete for the Best Presented Set Category?

Irrelevant! If they can bag a coin for PVC residue, they can bag a coin for other reasons, including excessive/deliberate damage.

I got a Jefferson Nickel back from PCGS last month in a body bag/flip with a sticker for PVC Residue.

Good point, it is an MS67

+1

Coincidentally, I just found a coin that this topic applies to. Does this Jefferson Nickel deserve a +, *, +*, or nothing at all?

I think due to my dogmatic nature, I am usually the guy that gets added to those lists rather than the guy doing the adding.

I'm not sure that it was the plus designation that hurt the star designation, but like you, I have been a fan of the star designation since its inception in the early 2000s, but as of late, it seems rather impossible to get a star out of NGC. I sent a submission last year where I was expecting anywhere from 5-10 stars. I got ZERO!!!! Then they took away the Designation Review service this year so if I wanted to send them back for reconsideration, I would have to submit the coin under the regrade service, pay full price, and get a new serial number. As for your original question, I typically would choose the star because that relates to eye appeal, but your Barber Dime seems the best way to go, get both the star and the + on the same coin. Currently, I only have one of those.

Oh yes, you certainly know snark, and we miss it over on CT. I think I might spend a little more time over here just to get some snark with Big Bang Theory references mixed in.

In the past I was able to send NGC graded coins in for "Designation Review" at a price of $12 per coin. I just checked to see if the prices have changed and I can't find the option for "Designation Review" anywhere on NGC's website. Additionally, the option no longer exists on the NGC submission forms either. Has "Designation Review" been eliminated? If so, how to I submit Jefferson Nickels that have 5 Full Steps but were graded prior to the inception of the 5FS designation in 2003? Also, how to I submit a coin that I feel deserves a star designation but was not given one at the time of grading? Thank you in advance, Paul