Grading class is in session. Give this one a shot.

[Raisethis2]

1940 Walker in an OGH ANACS slab.

 

Be amazed by my photography skills...........er, not so much.

 

 

[Bruceswar]

Given that it is an old holder, this coin is MS 64 by the holder, but now this coin is MS 65 by today's standards.

[FishyOne]

My guess is it's in a 63 holder.

[SPeck95512]

Given that it is an old holder, this coin is MS 64 by the holder, but now this coin is MS 65 by today's standards.

 

I agree with this assessment wholeheartedly.

[$ilverHawk]

I say that ANACS graded this coin as MS66. Central lines are good, fields are clear. Based on your pics, which show some hits on the center left thigh, this coin is a solid MS66 and should be MS66 in today s market.

 

I'm basing my evaluation by comparing your coin to a 1940 MS67 NGC CAC Walker that I own. It is is very comparable excepting the thigh hits. That evaluation is totally based on your pics.

 

Nice Walker.

 

Carl

[Raisethis2]

Reverse is perfect. Small hits on the thigh, the 2 rays nearest the gown and the worse hit is near the "L" in liberty.

[jerseycat10]

64

[coinman_23885]

By current standards, I would call this coin MS65+.

[physics-fan3.14]

1940 Walker in an OGH ANACS slab.

 

 

This does not make any sense: OGH refers to the Old Green Holders that PCGS used to use. ANACS used small white holders.

[coinman_23885]

1940 Walker in an OGH ANACS slab.

 

 

This does not make any sense: OGH refers to the Old Green Holders that PCGS used to use. ANACS used small white holders.

 

While the term old green holder is often used in reference to older PCGS slabs, I don't think PCGS has a monopoly on the term. He is referring to the old small holders with watermark/background image containing "ANACS" in green. I think his terminology is acceptable.

 

P.S. Older PCGS slabs weren't green either; it was their label. Your comment about the OGH description being inaccurate because the old small ANACS holders are white (or at least their plastic is), confuses me.

[bsshog40]

Given that it is an old holder, this coin is MS 64 by the holder, but now this coin is MS 65 by today's standards.

I agree with Bruce also!

[physics-fan3.14]

1940 Walker in an OGH ANACS slab.

 

 

This does not make any sense: OGH refers to the Old Green Holders that PCGS used to use. ANACS used small white holders.

 

While the term old green holder is often used in reference to older PCGS slabs, I don't think PCGS has a monopoly on the term. He is referring to the old small holders with watermark/background image containing "ANACS" in green. I think his terminology is acceptable.

 

P.S. Older PCGS slabs weren't green either; it was their label. Your comment about the OGH description being inaccurate because the old small ANACS holders are white (or at least their plastic is), confuses me.

 

Yes, the green refers to the label on the PCGS slabs. Yes, the white refers to the plastic on the ANACS slabs. So what? PCGS slabs are OGH, and only PCGS slabs. Using the term to describe an old NGC or ANACS holder makes no sense, and shows a lack of numismatic knowledge. Old ANACS slabs are refered to as "small white holders". Old NGC slabs are "fatties," "soap bars," "no line holders" or something else similarly descriptive. If I sold something described as an OGH and shipped an ANACS slab, it would be returned, nasty negative feedback left, and nobody would be happy - OGH means something very specific.

 

Saying you can use OGH to describe any other holder is like saying you can use "Big Mac" to describe the "Whopper." Just doesn't make sense.

[coinman_23885]

1940 Walker in an OGH ANACS slab.

 

 

This does not make any sense: OGH refers to the Old Green Holders that PCGS used to use. ANACS used small white holders.

 

While the term old green holder is often used in reference to older PCGS slabs, I don't think PCGS has a monopoly on the term. He is referring to the old small holders with watermark/background image containing "ANACS" in green. I think his terminology is acceptable.

 

P.S. Older PCGS slabs weren't green either; it was their label. Your comment about the OGH description being inaccurate because the old small ANACS holders are white (or at least their plastic is), confuses me.

 

Yes, the green refers to the label on the PCGS slabs. Yes, the white refers to the plastic on the ANACS slabs. So what? PCGS slabs are OGH, and only PCGS slabs. Using the term to describe an old NGC or ANACS holder makes no sense, and shows a lack of numismatic knowledge. Old ANACS slabs are refered to as "small white holders". Old NGC slabs are "fatties," "soap bars," "no line holders" or something else similarly descriptive. If I sold something described as an OGH and shipped an ANACS slab, it would be returned, nasty negative feedback left, and nobody would be happy - OGH means something very specific.

 

Saying you can use OGH to describe any other holder is like saying you can use "Big Mac" to describe the "Whopper." Just doesn't make sense.

 

While I don't wish to engage in a lengthy dialogue on nomenclature, there is a large difference between interchanging official brand names such as "Whopper" and "Big Mac" to this situation. His terminology is clear and it is obvious to anyone who collects certified coins (including yourself) that he is referring to the old small white ANACS holders with the green watermark. That was my point to you. Insofar as his description is accurate and it is clear what he is referring to, I see no problem with his terminology. After all, this is precisely how PCGS OGHs acquired their nicknames, and his coinage or new application of the phrase to the ANACS holders is justifiable. Moreover, it is noteworthy that he described it as an "ANACS OGH" not simply "OGH" so even if this were in a hypothetical sale, there would be no reason for negative feedback or a return. Again, it is inherently clear to everyone what he is referencing.

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

Again, I also do not want to engage in a lengthy debate either. However, Coinman, I will just say - you are wrong. He is not being clear at all, using confusing terminology, and absolutely switching up brands. OGH refers exclusively to PCGS, ANACS is completely different. I didn't realize this would be a point of contention, and there is no other way around it. I meant only to offer a simple correction to the OP, I didn't realize that it would be such a big deal.

[coinman_23885]

So, how do you distinguish between the old small white ANACS holders with the blue watermark versus the old small white ANACS holder with the green labels? What nomenclature do you use to distinguish between these other than the thing that is immediately noticeable between both - the color of their watermarks on the label? There is often a need to distinguish between these generations as the standards have changed (even though both are often regarded as being more conservative than the current ANACS). Disclaimer: I am asking this as a legitimate question, not to be sarcastic.

 

To the OP, what did the coin actually grade?

[Raisethis2]

Here is the slab it currently resides in. Sorry about the confusion created by the OGH/ANACS reference. That's what I've always called these but that might have been mis-information.

 

In any event, I think the coin is a MS 64+ by today's standards but it is what it is.

 

[physics-fan3.14]

So, how do you distinguish between the old small white ANACS holders with the blue watermark versus the old small white ANACS holder with the green labels? What nomenclature do you use to distinguish between these other than the thing that is immediately noticeable between both - the color of their watermarks on the label? There is often a need to distinguish between these generations as the standards have changed (even though both are often regarded as being more conservative than the current ANACS). Disclaimer: I am asking this as a legitimate question, not to be sarcastic.

 

 

I would be specific - small white holder with green watermark. There isn't really any slang abbreviation for them that I am aware of. You can also differentiate them by the type of serial number they have. As I mentioned earlier, OGH specifically references the older PCGS slabs - never the ANACS slab. The ideal way to be specific about them would be to reference them by slab generation number, aka Anacs 1 or Anacs 2 - similar to the NGC 2 or NGC 2.1. The slab generation catalogue was published by Conder101, and is the authoritative reference on the history of slabs.

[copper toning]

So, how do you distinguish between the old small white ANACS holders with the blue watermark versus the old small white ANACS holder with the green labels? What nomenclature do you use to distinguish between these other than the thing that is immediately noticeable between both - the color of their watermarks on the label? There is often a need to distinguish between these generations as the standards have changed (even though both are often regarded as being more conservative than the current ANACS). Disclaimer: I am asking this as a legitimate question, not to be sarcastic.

 

 

There isn't really any slang abbreviation for them that I am aware of.

 

There is now. ANACAS OGH. About to go mainstream. Geez!

[michael]

reverse 66

 

obverse 65

 

above average eye appeal

 

above average lustre and surfaces

 

with a good medium skin to the coin ie. coin is not overdipped/dipped out

[coinman_23885]

So, how do you distinguish between the old small white ANACS holders with the blue watermark versus the old small white ANACS holder with the green labels? What nomenclature do you use to distinguish between these other than the thing that is immediately noticeable between both - the color of their watermarks on the label? There is often a need to distinguish between these generations as the standards have changed (even though both are often regarded as being more conservative than the current ANACS). Disclaimer: I am asking this as a legitimate question, not to be sarcastic.

 

 

There isn't really any slang abbreviation for them that I am aware of.

 

There is now. ANACAS OGH. About to go mainstream. Geez!

 

 

I wasn't trying to start a debate. I have only used the term OGH to refer to PCGS old green holders; however, I think the neologism could catch on.

 

Remember, you heard it here first!

[copper toning]

Its all good. Funny stuff.

 

By the way Kenny thanks for turning me on to GC. Made a nice purchase Sunday night.

[nk1nk]

Is it just me or is Physics one uptight dude?! He's like a numismatic nazi! Everytime I read his posts my brain automatically translates his words with a heavy nasal tone.

 

I agree OGH is generally refered to PCGS holders but the constant correction and demand for perfection from physics is out of hand. Excuse me sir you can't post a test thread here, excuse me sir you can refer to that as a Anacs OGH, excuse me sir your experiment is not scientific enough, excuse me sir mods notified...............

 

I agree with coinman, not really that confusing, but then again im not a rocket scientist.

 

Nick

[Oldtrader3]

OGH is so pervasive throughout the hobby usage for the old PCGS holder that I find it confusing as well. I had no idea what you were referring to when you called the ANACS slab that title until I saw the picture. Sorry, not trying to take sides or be augumentative but PCGS has a 35 year head start on this one and you are the first to mix the metaphores. FWIW, I do not think that it will fly, probably in part because the ANACS labels are not green, they are white.

[James_OldeTowne]

I'll chip in 2-cents worth. There's been a movement away from stating "OGH" at all, because of the sarcastic and cynical belief that today, it means OverGraded Holder. That's because such a huge proportion of the nice coins have already been removed, and a lot of marginal stuff is left in the older slabs (same is true of NGC, and ironically, it's really true of ANACS!). "OGH" used to mean something special in a good way, but it's risky to use today in a positive context.

 

Any more, I simply call all those kinds of holders (ANACS, PCGS, NGC) "old holder" (OH).

[physics-fan3.14]

Nick, sorry if I've offended you. I mean no harm, and my intention is only to correct errors or inaccuracies. If that bothers you, just ignore me and you can live with the misinformation. Problem solved.

 

Last I knew, the point of this board was to learn and grow as collectors and numismatists. If we make up words and definitions and start spreading false information, then all we have left is anarchy. If you are wrong, I am going to tell you that you are wrong. I would expect you to do the same.

[Dudley the 1st]

I'll chip in 2-cents worth. There's been a movement away from stating "OGH" at all, because of the sarcastic and cynical belief that today, it means OverGraded Holder. That's because such a huge proportion of the nice coins have already been removed, and a lot of marginal stuff is left in the older slabs (same is true of NGC, and ironically, it's really true of ANACS!). "OGH" used to mean something special in a good way, but it's risky to use today in a positive context.

 

Any more, I simply call all those kinds of holders (ANACS, PCGS, NGC) "old holder" (OH).

 

 

Your choice to call it whatever you like. The fact is, is that the more prominent and notable auction houses still describe these first and second generation PCGS encapsulated pieces as " OGH ", and the term is widely recognized by collectors who still want them for their personal collections, as such. . For the most part, under-graded specimens have long been removed and re-submitted for up-grades. That is not meant to imply, that there still isn't value in these remaining encapsulated pieces., many of which you will locate now with a CAC sticker and are more apt to be quickly acquired ( at a premium I might add ) by a professional dealer for their private collection, not to be seen again for some lengthy duration again.

[Dudley the 1st]

Nick, sorry if I've offended you. I mean no harm, and my intention is only to correct errors or inaccuracies. If that bothers you, just ignore me and you can live with the misinformation. Problem solved.

 

Last I knew, the point of this board was to learn and grow as collectors and numismatists. If we make up words and definitions and start spreading false information, then all we have left is anarchy. If you are wrong, I am going to tell you that you are wrong. I would expect you to do the same.

 

 

You can lead a horse into the starting gate, that doesn't mean they are going to win though.

[Mokiechan]

This thread really devolved into a bit of silliness. The original reason for the post was almost loss in the asinine debate that ensued. Physics-Fan, sometimes you just have to let it go and just be satisfied with the knowledge that your convictions will always keep you warm.

 

Later,

Malcolm