Guess the Raw PL Grades

[physics-fan3.14]

Over the past couple of years, I've cherrypicked a few coins that I think have a good shot at being PL. Well, the time has finally come to submit and see what I got. These are going in the mail tomorrow, but in the meantime, lets guess what NGC will call them. Because these were all cherried from dealer's albums, the cost of the coins was basically nothing - and all I have to do is hit the PL on one of them to pay for the grading fees. So, guess away! I'll post what I think later.

 

(Obviously, the Walker is not PL - she's just a luster-bomb that I also picked up).

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AHFreak]

Edited to add that I think all 3 of those Kens will for sure grade PL.... Im not a nickel guy so im not sure what it takes for those to get the PL but based on the pics, and more importantly the guy who posted the thread, I would imagine if he says the nickel is PL, than it will grade PL....

 

66 on the nickel

65 on the first 68D

66 on the second 68D

65 on the 70D

66 or better on the WL.

 

 

Those Kennedys are awesome. I am going to start keeping an eye out for 1964-1970 PL business strike Kens.

 

 

[coinman_23885]

MS66* 5FS (assuming that isn't a deep scratch on the obverse devices)

MS64 PL

MS65*

MS65*

MS65+ shot MS66

 

Edited: In coming back to the thread, I think I was too harsh on the Walking Liberty Half. It should absolutely come back in a MS66 holder.

[nater222-migration]

4

5

6

4

6

[$ilverHawk]

Very difficult to judge PL from the pics. I can clearly see die polish in the first 4 examples, but die polish lines do not equate to a PL designation. In hand, the PL condition of the first 4 coins may be more readily determined.

 

Jefferson MS66

Kennedy 68D MS65 PL

Kennedy 68D MS64

Kennedy 70 MS65

Walker 43 easy MS66 maybe 67

 

Hope you get the PL's you are looking for.

 

Carl

[physics-fan3.14]

Thanks for the guesses everyone! For the record, here's what I think:

 

Jefferson - 65PL

68D #1 - 64PL

68D #2 - 65PL

70D - 64* with a 50/50 shot at PL

Walker - 66 (I don't think it makes 67, but that would be nice)

[Raisethis2]

 

 

 

1. MS 64

2. MS 65

3. MS 65 PL

4. MS 64 PL

5. MS 65+

 

 

Hope I'm being tight though.

 

 

[Walkerfan]

65

64

65

65

66

 

I will not attempt to judge PL qualities from images. That Walker has some GREAT original luster!! Blazing bands with absolutely no dullness or muting whatsoever.

[brokencompass]

They are all amazing coins. I particularly like the walker, the metal flow lines and the luster. I think it would grade a 66 too.

 

They are great pictures too! What kind of setup do you use?

[KMAG100]

What the heck, I'll take a stab

 

65

64 PL

65+

64

66+/67 I really like the look of the field on the Walker

 

On the walker is the detail above her outstretched arm considered to be weak or is that normal detail for that issue?

[Walkerfan]

On the walker is the detail above her outstretched arm considered to be weak or is that normal detail for that issue?

 

That is normal to above average detail for that area. That is not usually an area that is poorly struck.

[Tyler N.]

I say 65+ for the Walker. I would love to see the luster on it in-hand. It looks like it'd be blinding. The others are very good-looking, but not my series.

[Kurtdog]

You're not going to get cartwheels out of those. Except for the half, they're all proof-like.

 

[KMAG100]

On the walker is the detail above her outstretched arm considered to be weak or is that normal detail for that issue?

 

That is normal to above average detail for that area. That is not usually an area that is poorly struck.

 

 

 

 

So then this one would be one considered very well struck? Is the difference die wear? or is it the picture angle, that is not capturing the full detail?

[KMAG100]

Here is another

 

[Walkerfan]

On the walker is the detail above her outstretched arm considered to be weak or is that normal detail for that issue?

 

That is normal to above average detail for that area. That is not usually an area that is poorly struck.

 

 

 

 

So then this one would be one considered very well struck? Is the difference die wear? or is it the picture angle, that is not capturing the full detail?

 

It looks OK to me. I see one very small area that COULD be a die or planchet defect but it is very minute. That coin is 99% consistent with other examples that I have seen.

[$ilverHawk]

On the walker is the detail above her outstretched arm considered to be weak or is that normal detail for that issue?

 

That is normal to above average detail for that area. That is not usually an area that is poorly struck.

 

 

 

 

So then this one would be one considered very well struck? Is the difference die wear? or is it the picture angle, that is not capturing the full detail?

 

It's the picture angle and the fact that the area you are looking at is not a focal area when grading Walkers. Obverse Focal area is the central line, center skirt lines, hand definition, breast, head and fields. Secondary is the peripheral elements and the rays. When a photo is taken to emphasize the central line, peripheral areas may not show in true definition as viewed in hand.

 

Here's a MS67 photo that was meant to capture the overall definition of the coin. The central line does not look as sharp as what would be expected for a MS67. In hand, the central lines are sharp. Angle of photo. It only takes a few degrees of tilt to reveal the true definition of focal areas and if the photo is trying to capture the overall "look" of the coin, there will be areas of the coin that do not look "sharp".

 

 

The accurate "in hand" nature of photos is always an issue when judging the grade state of any coin from photos.

 

Carl

 

 

 

 

[KMAG100]

Love the toning on that coin silver Hawk....Takes on a wood grain look to me on the obverse. If you took that picture superb job!

[physics-fan3.14]

I got the grades a few days ago, and I'm kinda disappointed:

 

Nickel: MS-65* 5FS

68D #1: MS-64

68D #2: MS-65

70D: MS-64 PL

Walker: MS-65

 

I really thought at least one of the 68D's would have gotten PL (or a star at least!), and I really thought the Walker was 66! Oh well....

[coinman_23885]

I got the grades a few days ago, and I'm kinda disappointed:

 

Nickel: MS-65* 5FS

68D #1: MS-64

68D #2: MS-65

70D: MS-64 PL

Walker: MS-65

 

I really thought at least one of the 68D's would have gotten PL (or a star at least!), and I really thought the Walker was 66! Oh well....

 

I am surprised that there weren't more stars in the bunch.

[AHFreak]

I would like to attempt to make you feel better.....

 

Firstly, I sent a 1970 D Kennedy that I felt was prooflike to NGC around 3 weeks ago or whatever, and I got the coin back last week.... NO PL. Now, I will admit that this one is a "borderline" PL coin (or at least it wasn't a "no questions asked", hands down PL). I sort of felt like it would have a 50/50 shot and that it was worth sending just to see if it went PL. So, my PL Ken didn't PL either... Feel any better?

If not, how about this.... If you are ever tempted to entertain selling any of those non designated PL, proof like Kennedys... I would love to have that talk.. I buy coins not labels, and I have been looking to start my PL Kennedy collection. I saw your pics... I know you know what PL is...

IF you still don't feel any better I don't think this will help much either, but many if not most of what I submit I submit because I see Cameo, Deep/Ultracameo, or star, starcam, etc.. without being to specific, there are many a cameo proofs out there in non designated cameo holders... I would imagine the graders see PL business strikes, much much less than they see cameo proofs.. so knowing how often cameo, and DC/UC gets missed entirely, I can only imagine how often PL gets missed as well...

 

you wanna sell any of those PL Kens?

 

[brg5658]

I didn't chime in earlier because I didn't want to be a negative Nancy. I will just say that the PL designation is hit-or-miss. I've said it a lot, but I'll say it again.

 

I believe that coins (non-Morgans) that NGC designates with the PL or DPL attributes are almost always deserving, but getting a coin into a holder with those designations is hard. Even when the coin is clearly PL.

 

The star designation seems to be similar in my experience. Coins with stars I almost always agree with, but there are a lot of coins I see that seem star-worthy or potentially star-worthy but they don't make the cut.

 

I don't know the exact process, but I have heard that if any of the 3 graders/reviewers of the coin disagrees with the PL or DPL designation then it gets removed. I also presume the star is an "all in agreement" or none type designation.

 

In summary, I never count on the designations even for coins that seem to be clearly "all there PL" or just pop-wow-dang colorful "star" coins. When you get those designations it seems it was a good day for getting just the right combination of "pro" designation graders...when you don't get the designations it doesn't really mean the coins aren't worthy -- it just means they weren't worthy on that day with those graders (and various other variables like how well the grader slept the night before? )...

 

All nice coins, regardless...