A cool looking Capped Bust Half - grade revealed on 6-18....

[MarkFeld]

Feel free to guess the grade, but be forewarned, I think it's a potentially tricky one

 

[WinstonWare]

Wow! That is a sharp looking coin. I have no idea...um...MS65 PL?

[kryptonitecomics]

AU58....no way I can tell if there is wear on the cheek from those images but I grade it....NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[FILTHYHOARD]

I could definitely see it being proof or PL at the least (It appears to have a cameo type presence as well). Definitely a nicely struck coin.

If I had to guess I'd say it's a 64 and I'll go with PL

[Coindude]

Hard to tell grade due to the glare, not able to see if there's any rub on the devices. I would suspect that if there is rub it's due to being in a drawer and stored that way. The fields just look too clean to have been in circulation.

 

Again, a coin that could go anywhere from AU58 - MS66!

 

My guess is that it went MS65, and yes, it's PL but I don't think they designated that.

[Mark T]

It is either Au 58 or MS 65. The picture is way to blurry to guess a grade.

[physics-fan3.14]

Really can't tell anything from those pics. Could be AU, could be Gem. Could be Proof, could be prooflike. Might be nice, might be ugly. Just can't tell anything.

[MBA101]

From the pics, there could even be enough luster missing in the fields to warrant an AU-55 grade...

 

Could just be an MS 62 or 63 PL. But then again, I have not seen a PL designation before on a CBH. So maybe this one is just cool and Mark is messing with our heads a bit.

[Mark T]

Wait I get it - the coin is a Replica

[BillJones]

You can't really tell anything from these photos. This 1862 silver dollar was shot from two angles. Which coin do like better? It's the problem with trying to a Mint State or a Proof coin. You can make and educated guess, but you have really got to see those coins in person.

 

[jtryka]

A complete guess, MS-61.

[Didz]

I'm bad at this.. but I will say VF or XF Its hard to tell with pictures. I've been fooled many times.

[realone]

ms64, otherwise a tough photo to work with to determine anything else.

[EZ_E]

I call it FBL and I'm sticking with it!

[MarkFeld]

I will post additional images later this week.

[123cents]

Really can't tell anything from those pics. Could be AU, could be Gem. Could be Proof, could be prooflike. Might be nice, might be ugly. Just can't tell anything.

 

 

 

I agree!

[realone]

Just remember this is a test, he is always testing us

[RockMyAmadeus]

Just remember this is a test, he is always testing us

 

...if this had been an actual grading competition, local broadcasters in your area would direct you to your nearest coin shops...this is only a test....

[coinman1794]

From the pics, there could even be enough luster missing in the fields to warrant an AU-55 grade...

 

Could just be an MS 62 or 63 PL. But then again, I have not seen a PL designation before on a CBH. So maybe this one is just cool and Mark is messing with our heads a bit.

 

Considering it looks like an O-101 to me, and that I know how the O-101 looks in early die states...

 

NGC MS61PL

 

(Deep blue glass fields )

 

 

 

...I'm guessing that Mark's coin is Prooflike, though PCGS does not use that designation on anything other than Morgan dollars. I will go with an MS grade, though I cant say a specific grade from the images.

[Coindude]

I'd have to say that even with the bad pics that Mark put up, his looks nicer than yours. No offense! But yours looks to be a bit mushier strike and the fields have chatter. Digging the PL fields though!!!!!!!!!

[rrantique]

Ms-65 PL what a great looking coin.

[gbsten]

Hmmm...could be your image, but the stars look a little suspicious.

[MarkFeld]

Here's a very different image:

 

[MBA101]

Now I would say MS somethingish. Depending on luster etc, 62 to 65...a PL designation may be in order...

[realone]

I am standing pat, very nice example teach. I wish it was a bust dime, then I would e all over it!

[Coindude]

High points on the obverse look to be a bit flat, but based on the photos of the MS-61 posted earlier, I actually think this strike is better, albeit still a bit weak. Based on the previous photos, I still think the coin is PL based on the other photos.

 

I'll stick with my 65 PL, but no designation for PL because it's in a PCGS slab.

[Mark T]

Here's a very different image:

 

 

MS 62

[coinman1794]

I'd have to say that even with the bad pics that Mark put up, his looks nicer than yours. No offense! But yours looks to be a bit mushier strike and the fields have chatter. Digging the PL fields though!!!!!!!!!

 

Well, I dont think theres any question his is nicer, I'm just showing that O-101 is known in PL Also, my images are taken from the same angle as Mark's second set of pics, so you can't see the mirrors and cameo effect in my shots.

[okbustchaser]

The O-101 die pair was used for most of the 8 to 10 so-called proofs from 1834. (One is known from DM O-106--the King of Siam example--and 2 from DM O-108.) I suspect that this is one of the proofs.

 

Edit to add: "so-called" proofs because they aren't true proofs. They were presentation pieces struck from freshly polished dies.

[coinman1794]

I've often wondered if the O-101 was one of those commissioned for the striking of specimens. However, it says in Overton that the King of Siam specimen is an O-103, and that's what I have always thought.