How much does strike matter to you?

[dimefreak]

Imagine this coin has perfect surfaces, great eye appeal, and no hits........ What is the max grade this coin should receive with this mushy of a strike?

 

 

 

[Kurtdog]

I can't answer your question so I'll ask a related question and answer my own question. Does strike figure into the grade? No, not the technical grade. I'm nearly 99.9% certain, when it comes to the ANA, not the market grade, either. When it comes to the major TPGs, however, I do believe I'm more than 99.9% certain, they do figure it into the market grade. And, you have to admit, that's pretty certain.

 

Anyway, seriously, hope that helps.

[coinman_23885]

I can't answer your question so I'll ask a related question and answer my own question. Does strike figure into the grade? No, not the technical grade. I'm nearly 99.9% certain, when it comes to the ANA, not the market grade, either. When it comes to the major TPGs, however, I do believe I'm more than 99.9% certain, they do figure it into the market grade. And, you have to admit, that's pretty certain.

 

Anyway, seriously, hope that helps.

 

The ANA grading standards do consider luster, strike, and eye appeal as part of the technical grade (in addition to the surfaces of course, which is based on the number of contact marks). It also affects so-called market grading. With this said, your Barber Head Dime is not the worst example that I have seen and depending on the obverse, I could see the coin grading as high as MS64 or MS65.

 

[Walkerfan]

Another board member stated it and I will reiterrate it--

 

-Strike

-Luster/originality

-surf. Pres.

-Tone color.

 

In THAT order for ME!! Strike is Paramount.

 

I think that the TPGS have it backwards along the lines of

 

-Surface pres.

-Luster (and NOT necesarrily original which I HUGELY disagree with)!!

-Color and THEN

-Strike.

 

I DISAGREE completely but 'it is what it is'. I have seen so many a clean, SHINY (not necessarirly ORIGINAL), softly struck ULTRA GEMS that I want absolutely NO PART OF!! These coins or their HUGE price stickers!!!

 

TRUTH

 

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

Does strike figure into the grade? No, not the technical grade.

We at the EAC most definitely do take "strike" into consideration when assessing a technical grade. As an example, given a specific date and Sheldon variety, and die-state, if it normally comes sharply struck and a particular example is mushy, it will warrant downgrade.

 

For that matter, is a particular die-state is usually mushy and an amazingly sharp example is found, it might well be UPgraded by comparison to the usual strike quality.

[physics-fan3.14]

Strike absolutely plays into the grade! I value it very highly, whereas the TPG's and most collectors seem to place a low priority on it. The strike on your coin seems consistent with a 65 grade.

[$ilverHawk]

I can't answer your question so I'll ask a related question and answer my own question. Does strike figure into the grade? No, not the technical grade. I'm nearly 99.9% certain, when it comes to the ANA, not the market grade, either. When it comes to the major TPGs, however, I do believe I'm more than 99.9% certain, they do figure it into the market grade. And, you have to admit, that's pretty certain.

 

Anyway, seriously, hope that helps.

 

From ANA Grading Standards, page 21.

 

"A coin which is MS-65 from a technical or numerical viewpoint but which is lightly struck can be described as MS-64, or MS-63, or some lower grade, without mentioning the weakness; this is the practice of most third-party grading services at present. A weakly struck coin cannot be graded MS-65 or finer. To qualify as MS-65 a coin must have a fairly sharp strike (but not necessarily a full strike)."

 

In the section on grading terminology, ANA clearly mentions strike as a strong contributor to grades above MS-64. (With a curious omission in the description of MS-66).

 

A coins strike is a very important component of the overall grade.

 

I would describe the OP s coin as fairly sharply struck but not fully struck.

 

Carl

 

 

[Walkerfan]

That is what they SAY but MANY TPGS and their graded coins are given MS 65+ 66+ & HIGHER benedictions just because of smooth unabraded fields and BRIGHT-- OFTEN DIPPED or WORSE---DIPPED OUT LUSTER! The 1935-S & D are PRIME examples! This is why I don't pay STUPID money for an insert number and some extra registry points!!!

[Walkerfan]

BTW-I'm not a dime nut but I think that the strike on your dime looks nice enough to me.

[dimefreak]

Its not my dime..... All of my coins have color I was just checking the pop of one of my coins and this is the MS67 Plate coin.... EX Simpson. I thought it was pretty flat for a TOP POP coin

[James_OldeTowne]

Its not my dime..... All of my coins have color I was just checking the pop of one of my coins and this is the MS67 Plate coin.... EX Simpson. I thought it was pretty flat for a TOP POP coin

It's the reverse of the dime, which is the side of lesser importance. What does the obverse look like? And, the strike is not horrible, though it is somewhat weak. If grading by that side alone, I would have limited the upside to MS-66, unless the obverse is MS-68 or something and really carries the grade.

[astrostu]

Don't have any real opinion on the technical grade, but when I look at coins to buy, I look at the strike within the grade I want. Peace dollars are a biggie -- that hair came out really flat most of the time, so regardless of grade I pass over the flat hair.

[leeg]

Strike is an important factor to me when buying coins.

[coinman_23885]

Its not my dime..... All of my coins have color I was just checking the pop of one of my coins and this is the MS67 Plate coin.... EX Simpson. I thought it was pretty flat for a TOP POP coin

 

The strike definitely takes it out of MS67 territory IMO. I would have guessed MS65 tops.

[Kurtdog]

Does strike figure into the grade? No, not the technical grade.

We at the EAC most definitely do take "strike" into consideration when assessing a technical grade. As an example, given a specific date and Sheldon variety, and die-state, if it normally comes sharply struck and a particular example is mushy, it will warrant downgrade.

 

For that matter, is a particular die-state is usually mushy and an amazingly sharp example is found, it might well be UPgraded by comparison to the usual strike quality.

The only thing I'd change is "technical grade" to "market grade" in your first sentence. Strike has always been considered to enhance or reduce (as the case may be) the value of a coin. It has never been considered to enhance or reduce (as the case may be) the technical grade of the coin. Enter, market grading. We're now at liberty to do just as you're saying with the grades based on the strike of the coin. That's how I've always understood it, anyway.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Imagine this coin has perfect surfaces, great eye appeal, and no hits........ What is the max grade this coin should receive with this mushy of a strike?

 

 

 

Good Morning to all.

 

I have disclosed many times that I have no ability to grade or accurately interpret technical aspects of a coin from pictures, and those who know me may say "or any other way".

 

I repeat same now, prior to commenting.

 

Pray tell what is mushy?

 

Is this in reference to what I view as a slight "orange peel" appearance around the rim?

 

Is it the very slight (to me) "rounding" appearance of the letters?

 

Is it the inability to see a lot of veins in the leaves?

 

All of the above?

 

I like this coin, and would welcome it as an addition to my minor collection.

 

Then again, I lead a rather sheltered life in the numismatic world.

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

John, I would direct you to my thread about strike, which can be found here: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3929444#Post3929444

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

John, I would direct you to my thread about strike, which can be found here: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3929444#Post3929444

 

Thank You.

Now, what is the formula for Black Hole Chaos Constants, as it applies to Gravitational Waves?

 

Respectfully,

John Curlis

[Kurtdog]

John, I would direct you to my thread about strike, which can be found here: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3929444#Post3929444

Jason, what an educational and thought-provoking thread. You got down to the quantum level in that one. (thumbs u

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

John, I would direct you to my thread about strike, which can be found here: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3929444#Post3929444

Jason, what an educational and thought-provoking thread. You got down to the quantum level in that one. (thumbs u

 

Don't think I am ignoring that "quantum level" thing...I have my eye on you.....

you didn't answer my formula question either.

 

John Curlis

 

[Dcoin]

As a Bullafo Nickel collector I have come to value strike above all else.

 

However I'm not sure that applies to other series. Does a Shield Nickel, with its simple design,have the same value to its stike? Debatable.

[Kurtdog]

John, I would direct you to my thread about strike, which can be found here: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3929444#Post3929444

Jason, what an educational and thought-provoking thread. You got down to the quantum level in that one. (thumbs u

 

Don't think I am ignoring that "quantum level" thing...I have my eye on you.....

you didn't answer my formula question either.

 

John Curlis

I'm waiting for Jason to go first. After all, he's the physicist, I'm just a dog.

[dimefreak]

I agree that certain series matter more than others. Lehigh96 made a great point a couple years ago when he was showing how some of the best strikes still miss the FS designation on Jefferson Nickels. I do however think in this case that the corn kernels should be visible....... They are my favorite part of the reverse...... Corn on a coin?

[lehigh96]

While I understand why some collectors covet strike above all else, I am not a member of that crowd for one simple reason. Strike is evaluated on a curve! The quality of strike changes by date/mm. The easiest example to provide is the difference in strike between "S" mint and "O" mint common date Morgan Dollars. Consider that these two coins are both graded MS66.

 

 

Nobody will dispute that the 1881-S has a much better strike than the 1884-O, but IMO, both of these coins exhibit a strike that is average for their respective date/mm.

 

From PCGS's OFFICIAL GUIDE TO COIN GRADING AND COUNTERFEIT DETECTION, this is the very first passage about strike as an element of grading.

 

Strike is one of the most important elements of higher-grade coins. In grades of MS-65 and PR-65 and higher, the coin must be well struck. If a coin has nearly perfect surfaces but is not well struck, PCGS will assign a grade of no higher than MS-64.

 

Anyone who reads that would logically conclude that an incomplete strike would be a grade limiting factor. But anyone can plainly see that the photo of the 1884-O Morgan above clearly contradicts that statement. Now I know the coin shown above is in an NGC holder, but I promise there are coins exactly like that one residing in premium gem PCGS holders as well. When the TPG's talk about a coin being well struck, it is based upon the quality of the strike in relation to the typical strike produced for that date/mm. In other words, by the standards of the New Orleans mint for Morgan Dollars in 1884, that coin is well struck. If the 1881-S were to have that same strike, it would be limited to a grade of MS64, despite the fact that it had premium gem surfaces.

 

I firmly believe that this practice of rating strike relative to date/mm diminishes the overall significance of strike as an element of grading. Having said that, I truly admire and believe that the most advanced collectors are those that actually take the time to learn about the strike characteristics for each date/mm of their series and seek out an above average struck example for every coin in their collection.

 

To illustrate my point further, take a look at the two photos below.

 

 

Now tell me which one has the better strike? and why?

[johnny9434]

i always liked a decent strike no matter. jmo

[coinman_23885]

While I understand why some collectors covet strike above all else, I am not a member of that crowd for one simple reason. Strike is evaluated on a curve! The quality of strike changes by date/mm. The easiest example to provide is the difference in strike between "S" mint and "O" mint common date Morgan Dollars. Consider that these two coins are both graded MS66.

 

Nobody will dispute that the 1881-S has a much better strike than the 1884-O, but IMO, both of these coins exhibit a strike that is average for their respective date/mm.

 

From PCGS's OFFICIAL GUIDE TO COIN GRADING AND COUNTERFEIT DETECTION, this is the very first passage about strike as an element of grading.

 

Strike is one of the most important elements of higher-grade coins. In grades of MS-65 and PR-65 and higher, the coin must be well struck. If a coin has nearly perfect surfaces but is not well struck, PCGS will assign a grade of no higher than MS-64.

 

Anyone who reads that would logically conclude that an incomplete strike would be a grade limiting factor. But anyone can plainly see that the photo of the 1884-O Morgan above clearly contradicts that statement. Now I know the coin shown above is in an NGC holder, but I promise there are coins exactly like that one residing in premium gem PCGS holders as well. When the TPG's talk about a coin being well struck, it is based upon the quality of the strike in relation to the typical strike produced for that date/mm. In other words, by the standards of the New Orleans mint for Morgan Dollars in 1884, that coin is well struck. If the 1881-S were to have that same strike, it would be limited to a grade of MS64, despite the fact that it had premium gem surfaces.

 

I firmly believe that this practice of rating strike relative to date/mm diminishes the overall significance of strike as an element of grading. Having said that, I truly admire and believe that the most advanced collectors are those that actually take the time to learn about the strike characteristics for each date/mm of their series and seek out an above average struck example for every coin in their collection.

 

To illustrate my point further, take a look at the two photos below.

 

Now tell me which one has the better strike? and why?

 

I agree with your underlying point about strike being "graded" on a curve; however, I disagree with your assumption concerning the 1884-O. You are assuming that the coin is properly graded. Even considering the average strike of an 1884-O, I still think the strike limits your coin to a grade of MS65.

[coinman_23885]

For me, the order of importance is:

 

1. Luster/Originality/ surface preservation (tie)

2. Strike

3. Tone/color or other unusual or special attributes

 

Since it is hard to determine true step differences with the lack of equal-interval data, I would say that I affix a rough percentage to each of these factors in the following scheme (all assuming positive overall eye appeal):

 

Luster 35%

Surface Preservation 35%

Strike 20%

Tone/Special Attribute 10%

 

Lack of Overall Eye Appeal = Auto-reject

 

Of course, there are some exceptions where a category warrants "extra credit" (i.e. a truly outstanding rainbow toned early walker or one with a sharp strike would certainly be worth a premium given the exceptional/unusual attributes of these coins, etc.).

[Walkerfan]

I rate it in a sort of descending progressive nature. For instance--

 

1. Strike-40% Most important

 

2.-Originality 30% very important but I will accept a lusterous dipped coin but NEVER a dull lifeless one no matter how sharp the strike.

 

3.-Surface preservation-20% still very important but I realize that whispy abrasionions and minute marks are inevitable just as long as they are not deep or singularly distracting

 

4.-Color/tone 10%-least important to me as there are many AT pieces out there and sometimes a coin is OVERGRADED with an ultra high premium attached for the color ALONE. I appreciate a beautifully toned piece but it should not trump all else and you should not have to pay TRIPLE value for it (IN MY OPINION). I have seen SOME Walkers that are spectacularly toned and I WOULD pay triple sheet for them but they are FEW and far between. Especially, before 1934.

[coinman_23885]

 

To illustrate my point further, take a look at the two photos below.

 

 

Now tell me which one has the better strike? and why?

 

Both have relatively sharp strikes. With regards to the obverse, I see more details on Mr. Jefferson's jaw line. The reverses of the coins are very interesting. The top, full step example, has less detail in the foyer/doors of Monticello. The bottom, non-full step coin, has more detail in the foyer/doors of Monticello, but weaker steps. I would call it a statistical tie, but in fairness, I don't know the series as well as you do and the coins may receive a special "bonus" because the date may usually be weakly struck.

 

EDITED TO ADD: I didn't even pay attention to the dates. The 1954-s does look sharply struck for the date. It's gorgeous.

[BillJones]

It depends upon how bad the strike really is. If it's real mush, you could be down to MS-63 for a maximum. For a few pre fedeal coins and Charlotte and Dahlonega gold coins I've seen, the max could be down to MS-60 or 61. Average mush, MS-64. If it's just a bit weak, MS-65.

 

To me coins that are graded MS-66 and better should have really sharp strikes with no weakness in the design.