• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Hmm, I thought I knew what "Star" worthy was.

19 posts in this topic

I found this 1961-D Roosevelt along with a 1972 Kennedy (NGC PF68*) in my mail box yesterday. I can't believe the generosity of some of our board members. Dean1345 passed these along to me for a few pictures I had taken for him. Just viewing his beautiful Indians was gift enough. Thank you Dean. (thumbs u

 

I instantly fell in love with this Roosevelt. Does anyone see what kept the Star off the holder? I've certainly seen less eye appealing coins with the award.

 

Extra large image After clicking on link, click on newly opened image to make larger.

 

 

 

590f87df.jpg

0fd17958.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep the toning just isnt smooth enough (to many breaks).

 

I agree, NGC is very tough on coins with too many toning breaks. And while the color is nice, without the vibrancy provided by luster, the star designation is not deserved IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks nice IMO, but again there seems to be good amount of darker grayish color on the obverse as well, and NGC would rather give a blast white coin with a arc of rainbow a star, over a fully toned obverse with some darker toning for some reason?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The toning is a little darker than they like and the luster doesn't appear toi be booming. With that said....forget about trying to figure out the designation as I have at least 5 no brainer star coins in my collection that don't have stars so I have just come to realize that there can be a large gap between my definition of eye appeal and theirs hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies.

 

It looks like I knew less about the stars than I thought. I was really mostly about curiosity than anything else. I appreciate all the comments that help with my learning experience.

 

As many have noticed, it doesn't have a ton of luster and is on the darker side, but it is a cool coin with great color. It's a fun coin to look at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies.

 

It looks like I knew less about the stars than I thought. I was really mostly about curiosity than anything else. I appreciate all the comments that help with my learning experience.

 

As many have noticed, it doesn't have a ton of luster and is on the darker side, but it is a cool coin with great color. It's a fun coin to look at.

 

Bob,

 

I have come to realize that comprehension of NGC's application of the star designation has nothing to do with collector knowledge. We all need to recognize that eye appeal is subjective. Since the star designation requires unanimous agreement from the graders and finalizer, it only takes one of them to have an aversion to something about the coin to 86 the star designation.

 

However, I sincerely believe that this coin does not deserve a star based on NGC's past history. Roosevelt Dimes are very common with attractive toning but many exhibit toning breaks like your coin. Every Rosie I have seen with this many toning breaks has been denied the star designation. Here is an example from my collection.

 

RooseveltDime1953-SNGCMS671867218-0.jpg

 

The coin shown above is a 1953-S NGC MS67 with incredible color and luster but too many toning breaks for NGC's liking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob...........I love the green & rose toning of your Roosie.

 

I do too Dean. It won't be going anywhere other than sitting next to my mattes. :grin:

 

Thanks for your generosity Dean. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites