May I Have Your Thoughts on Five Mid-Grade Walking Liberty Halves?

[TomB]

There are quite a few images in this thread, so I apologize in advance for those with slow connection speeds. Also, the images are a little large in an effort to help see detail.

 

The other day I posted an image of a mid-grade WLH and Hays put foward a grade for the coin. The grade was a little lower than what was on the slab, and he seemed surprised by the number. This made me think about the wide range of "looks" that one can find within the mid-grade range for this series, and I was hoping that folks might care to give some opinions on several pieces from the earlier years of the design.

 

Also, although the WLH series is wildly popular, it seems that we have very few threads about these great coins on the NGC boards. Therefore, I thought I would try a version of "guess the grade" where decent images are shown, along with descriptive text, and opinions are sought on the relative strengths or weaknesses of the coins in question as well as any grades, if folks care to guess.

 

Below are five pairs of images, for obverse and reverse, of WLHs dated 1921 or before. There are both raw and slabbed coins, not all the coins are the same grade and there are no third-world slab services represented. I will post information that I believe is relevant for grading each coin and I would hope that people would take the time to give me their opinions on any piece they would like to comment on. This may include a guess at the grade or a statement as to eye appeal, or lack thereof.

 

At least two of these coins I have shown previously and have mentioned the grade in a thread, so please try not to search these out since I want honest evaluations. Also, I will post again to the thread, but will likely not post the grade opinions until tomorrow night so as to let more people see the images.

 

1917-S Obverse The images were taken in direct sunlight and the coin was unfortunately slightly out of focus during this time. There is still remaining depth to Ms Liberty's left leg, quite a few skirtlines are present, the earhole is just a speck and about one-third of Ms Liberty's left breast is outlined. There are individual feathers visible in each leg of the eagle, as well as outlining the eagle's breast and torso. The coin has original skin, is a deeper tan than portrayed and has no "shine".

 

1919-D The images of this coin are pretty darn accurate. They were obtained with a combination of sunlight and a pair of Ott lights. Significant skirtlines are present, as is the beginning of the bifurcation of the thumb, approximately two-thirds of the outline of the left breast and one line making up the "inverted V" of the earhole. The eagle's right leg is well detailed and about one-quarter to one-third of the breast feathers are visible. However, there is an unfortunate scratch running in a straight line from the crest of the eagle's skull through the right wing and ending at the ridge line of the left wing. This is a fairly new scratch. There is also an injury to the top of the breast that would have taken out the clavical and sternum and appears as a lighter patch of silver in the image. The injured area is about the size of the eagle's head and has the original patina removed as well as having had the metal scraped.

 

1920-D This image was taken with a combination of two Reveal bulbs and two Ott lights. The true color is a richer, deeper chestnut without the green hue. Substantial skirtlines remain, the "inverted V' earhole is present, there is almost the beginning of the bifurcation of the thumb and the left breast is about one-half outlined. The eagle's right leg shows very little wear and the breast has about one-third of its feathers remaining. The coin has perfect original color and surfaces.

 

1921 Image obtained with two Reveal bulbs. The color shown is really much closer to the true look of the 1920-D and this coin is a touch lighter and more grey than the images suggest. The left breast is about four-fifths complete, the thumb bifurcation is present, the "inverted V' well-formed and the skirtlines are strong. The eagle's right leg is well preserved and about half of the breast feathers are distinct. There is a small field cut on the obverse, behind Ms Liberty, but this is fairly trivial.

 

1921-S This image was taken with two Ott lights and natural sunlight, which resulted in the color being very accurate. About three-quarters of the left breast is complete, the thumb is not visible, the skirtlines are nearly fully represented and the earhole is just a speck. The eagle's right leg is fairly strong but the breast feathers are only about one-quarter present.

[supertooth]

Tom----Been meaning to PM you anyway---so, to keep from spoiling your fun, I will give my answers in the PM. Bob [supertooth]

[Brotherman]

I saw this briefly earlier today and wanted to respond but work keeps

interrupting my fun. Don’t you hate when that happens? Anyway, thanks

for keeping your answers private Bob - because once you post everyone else

is going to either duplicate your answers or not post at all.

So here it goes:

The 1917 S obverse - At first I thought this was an F12, but the right breast

should only be at best 2/3 done for an F12. The right breast is complete, but

the left breast doesn’t show at all. On the reverse you can see the eagle’s

pupil and ear hole too - that makes it an F16

The 1919 D

The Fox book doesn’t have an example of a coin like this. It has a little

more detail than an F16 but not quite the detail of a VF 20. My main

attention here is on the breast line. The left breast line should be visible on

a VF20, on this coin it is not. Notice on the reverse that you can see

each feather distinctly on the leading edge of the eagle’s front wing. The

eagle’s ear hole is visible too. Most would call this a F18

The 1920 D

I believe is a solid F16. The breast line is not complete and it should be in the

VF grades. The right breast is well defined and the reverse shows more

feathers than one would find on an F12. Notice the ear hole, it is there but

not as defined as it was on the last coin.

The 1921

This coin shows the full breast line. You can also see details in her sandal,

so right off we know this is a VF coin. Her back leg shows quite a bit

of roundness too. On the reverse there is a definite separation in the

eagle’s breast and the front leg. You can also see a few feathers on the

eagle’s breast. I think this one in a VF30.

The 1921 S

The obverse on this coin is a solid F16 it might push F18. The right breast

is complete and there is a hint on the left breast line. Her sandal is distinct

and some detail is visible as well. The reverse was a bit surprising. I expected

to easily see the eagle’s ear hole and I expected to see more defined feathers

in the front wing - but not all coin wear exactly the same. I would say the

reverse on this coin is an F12. My net grade on this coin would be an F16.

 

Thanks for giving us a crack at these Tom!

 

Hays

 

I edited this to change my grade on the 17 S Obverse. When I reread your post

I noticed that you said 2/3 of the left breast line was evident, but didn’t show

on the photo. The breast line is very important in determining Fine from

Very Fine. Since the entire breast line isn’t complete we can rule out a VF

grade, but it does have more of the left breast line than I initially thought so

I’m upping my grade on this coin to an F18.

[Brotherman]

Tom,

 

Thanks again go showing us these circulated coins. Often the focus seems to

be on MS coins. MS coins are great - I love looking at them, but if being in

this hobby meant that I had to collect in that grade then I guess I’d be

building model boats right now.

If others would take another good look at Tom’s coins you can begin to see

how challenging collecting circulated coins can be. Look at the rims on all

of these coins - no hits or dings anywhere! The fields are also almost free

from any major hits or scratches. The one coin that does have a significant hit

on the obverse is the 1920 D - but the placement is in the gown right by the

sun and isn’t distracting.

It is very difficult finding an original circulated coin that is in the grade you

are collecting - BUT finding that coin where the rims are intact AND there are

no major hits or scratches makes it even tougher!

 

Hays

[TomB]

Thank you for giving such well thought out posts, Hays, and I will give you a little more information about the coins. The 1920-D does not have a hit on the obverse, this is just retained dirt that appears as though it is a mark in the image. The coin with a surface injury is the 1919-D, which has severe reverse damage (in my opinion) that does not show up well in the image. Below please find the 1919-D reverse with the scratch as a red line and the area with removed patina outlined in red.

[MikeKing]

maybe I shouldn't put my 2 cents in because I don't know how to grade Walkers, esp uncirculated ones, but the 1921 is a very nice coin, it is exactly what I'm looking for in a '21.

[CarolinaCollector]

Tom --

 

I am hardly an expert on this series, but here are my grades:

 

1917-S Obv. F-15 (VF-20 reverse -- looks just like mine! Ms. Liberty's left breast must have been weakly struck on all of these)

1919-D VF-25 (Tough to find)

1920-D VF-20 (Another really difficult date in this condition)

1921 VF-35 (Nice - way better than mine)

1921-S F-15 (VF-20+ obverse - nice - better than mine)

 

Very nice circs! It must have taken quite a while to acquire these.

 

Bill

[MunkyMan95]

I'm woth Mike on this one... Walkers really aren't my forte, but I like the '21 very much. Nice original color, and just enough detail left to qualify as beautiful.

[Brotherman]

Tom, I’m happy to learn that it’s only dirt on the 20 D - but not so happy to

hear about the damage on the 19 D. The 19 D is also one of those tough coins

to land in this grade. I see the scratch as well as the rub now that you pointed

it out. Hope it’s not too distracting in hand.

You have a nice group here with some tougher dates as well. Do you have

a complete set? I think the 20 D and the 17 S Obverse are my favorites, though

I would be proud to have any of them in my collection.

 

Hays

[Brotherman]

Tom --

 

I am hardly an expert on this series, but here are my grades:

 

1917-S Obv. F-15 (VF-20 reverse -- looks just like mine! Ms. Liberty's left breast must have been weakly struck on all of these)

1919-D VF-25 (Tough to find)

1920-D VF-20 (Another really difficult date in this condition)

1921 VF-35 (Nice - way better than mine)

1921-S F-15 (VF-20+ obverse - nice - better than mine)

 

Very nice circs! It must have taken quite a while to acquire these.

 

Bill

 

You are right. Weak strikes plagued all the early dates in this series...

kind of making me second guess my grades.

 

Naw - i'm going down with my ship.

 

Hays

[Bruceswar]

All I can say about these coins is the grades while being a factor to a degree I have seen many many more higher grading pieces that these would BLOW away as far as eye appeal. These are some smoking coins and some of these are super tough to find as nice as these ones. Great coins and thanks for posting!

[Brotherman]

I recently had a motherboard go south on my computer and just got a

replacement computer. My sister – the goofy girl that she is – gave me a

present for her birthday! It was a brand new 21” flat panel monitor. The thing

is beautiful and VERY bright. I logged in tonight on a different computer

and looked at Tom’s coins again… His 1921 just knocked my socks off! I

think he has posted this beauty before, but I didn’t recognize it because of the

new monitor. THAT COIN is my favorite!

 

Hays

[TomB]

Thanks! I have to admit, I get some good-natured "hate mail" every time I post that coin because it tortures certain members.

 

I will post grades and some text tomorrow night in case anyone who was at Baltimore would like to contribute.

[Bruceswar]

I did not post the grades as I know a good number of them. I did not want to spoil the fun! Sweet coins!

[James_OldeTowne]

Here are my comments and guesses prior to reading any other posts:

 

1917-S obverse

I grade very close to VF-20 (if not there) and nicely original. These are very tough to grade by the obverse, because Liberty's bust always looks too flat to support a grade above Fine, but if you judge it by the reverse detail, you'll see an awful lot of feather detail in there. The strike is a tad weak, although the sun's rays are surprisingly strong, but I like (and need!) this coin.

 

1919-D

VF-25 or 30, slightly better struck than these usually are, and original. Plenty of skirt lines, but the eagle's breast is too flat to support EF, and I'm not seeing any mint luster. Good, strong rims, the brownish spots could possibly be troublesome if PVC related. The shiny spot on the eagle is odd as well, and could also be PVC-derived. The reverse scratch is irrelevant at this grade level, being consistent with a moderately circulated coin.

 

1920-D

Picture-perfect VF-20. The bust line is exactly what's expected of VF, plenty of feather detail, and the expected central softness on both sides.

 

1921

VF-30 or 35, possibly even EF, since the graes on this date are sometimes "pushed". Indeed, the skirtlines are about 90% of where they need to be for EF, and the eagle is showing some breast feathers. The sun's rays are well-defined. Just a lack of a little luster is all that really keeps this out of EF consideration.

 

1921-S

VF-25 or 30, but too flat in the feather detail to support a higher grade. The 6th and 7th sun's rays suggest the VF grade, and Liberty's torso is fairly well worn. Again, nicely original.

 

James

[TomB]

It is quite interesting to read the responses within this thread that contain grade estimations. I am not familiar with the grade of F16 and assume derivation from the Fox book on WLHs. If this is incorrect, I would be delighted to find out the true source. Below I will list the grades of the coins as I grade them, along with any TPG-given grade and some comments. First, however, I would like to acknowledge the difficulty that is inherent in grading coins via images, even if the images are decent overall, and will admit that I have an advantage over others in the grading of these coins since I can examine them in-hand. Additionally, I do not know that it is imperative that each of us agrees on the grade of every coin. It is likely that as we gain experience in a given series, or in general, that we will develop our own internal grading system that deviates somewhat from the ANA system and that is predicated upon those characteristics that are most important to each of us. In my opinion, the originality of a coin's surface and the likelihood that marks on a coin are contemporary with its circulation are important factors in the final grade determination.

 

All of the coins below are within the F-VF range and I will stick with the ANA accepted grade designations of F12, F15, VF20, VF25, VF30 and VF35. Those coins that are in slabs may or may not reflect the then-current grading standards of the TPG involved, and those grading standards may or may not be in current use. In my opinion, NGC is more liberal than PCGS in grading WLHs with respect to remaining detail, while PCGS is more liberal than NGC in grading WLHs with respect to altered surfaces. That is, on average, PCGS values remaining detail and is hesitant to penalize a coin for lack of original surfaces while NGC values original surfaces and a coin with slightly less detail will receive a boost in grade because of those surfaces. I will end my rant by stating that the PCGS-driven quest for "luster" appears to have taken on the working definition that a coin must have minimal or no original crust and color in order to display that "luster". The term "luster" is in quotes because one may often observe true luster through or around original crust and color without imparting harm to the surfaces. These observations are consistent with the WLH, CBH, DBH, FH and especially the Barber series of issues.

 

Lastly, my personal preference is to grade a coin based upon its overall remaining details, surface characteristics and eye appeal. The minutia of my grading paradigm is not always consistent with ANA accepted standards, but the final grade given is typically identical to or very close to the ANA grade. As an example, I do not require every bit of every letter of LIBERTY to be clearly visible for a Barber half dollar to be a VF coin because the reality of the situation is that many Barber half dollars have choice VF details remaining without having LIBERTY complete in this manner. Therefore, I grade the entire coin and not simply a small portion of it.

 

1917-S: This coin is raw and unfortunately, the images were very poor. It has completely original surfaces and in a perfect world, I would like to see every F12 look like this. However, reality as I have observed it dictates that a TPG-graded F12 WLH is likely to have less meat and will have a high probability of being much less original. Therefore, I consider this coin to be an F15 and believe that it would likely earn the F15 grade from a TPG. This piece is my WLH representative in my Dansco 7070 type album.

 

1919-D: This coin makes me cry. It is in a PCGS VF25 holder and it is a damn shame. To me, this is an illustration of PCGS getting the technical grade correct while ignoring surface problems. The obverse is perfect, original and untouched. However, the reverse, which is otherwise consistent with the obverse, has not only the long and noticeably thick scratch mentioned previously, it also has a horrible surface injury. The upper-central portion of the eagle's breast presents a significant problem, with the result being the scraped removal of the original patina and the movement of metal. In my opinion, the coin has VF25 details and otherwise original surfaces that have been significantly marred by the reverse contact. If the scrape and scratch were contemporary with the coin's circulation then they would not bother me, however, I do not own this coin; the reverse issues preclude my purchase of it. Please let me make perfectly clear that the reverse injury is not consistent with circulation, but happened long after the coin was retired from active duty.

 

1920-D: This coin is graded VF25 by NGC and in my opinion is an example of NGC awarding a slightly higher grade, than remaining details alone would merit, based upon the coin's original surfaces. To my eyes, the details remaining are consistent with what I would hope to see on a VF20 WLH, but the surfaces are so exquisitely original and problem-free that I have no problem with the awarding of a VF25 grade. In this example, the value difference between a VF20 and VF25 is trivial while the value difference in originality is immense. Please note that the coin is actually a rich chestnut or amber color and that my color settings were incorrect when the image was taken, resulting in a coin with a slight green cast to it.

 

1921: I have written about this coin before and that thread discusses the properties of the piece. The grade is VF25 by PCGS and it is without doubt undergraded. The grade was improper at the time of grading, in the old green holder, and has continued to stay undergraded through the various shifts in grading standards over the last ten years. Only the small cut in the field behind Ms Liberty keeps this coin from being essentially perfect. The cut is trivial, occurred during circulation and is therefore inconsequential to me. The image of the coin is somewhat underlit and the piece is actually greyer. I grade this coin as a strong VF30. This is clearly the strongest piece in this group.

 

1921-S: This coin has given me the most problems in grading it. The coin is currently in an ANACS VF25 holder and, while I can agree with the VF term, I am equivocal with the VF25 grade. At first glance, this coin looks too weak to have earned the VF20 grade, which is the grade that I lean toward on the coin. However, this is one issue where I invoke the strong consideration of striking characteristics. The highest points of this coin do not show that much detail, but the recessed areas are stronger than would be expected if the coin's grade only took into consideration high point detail. This observation, coupled with the long accepted striking inadequacies of the 1921-S issue, lead me to believe the coin is truly a VF20. The appearance of this coin is not what I would consider the ideal VF20, with its weaker high point and stronger recessed areas, but it is certainly too much of a coin to be an F15.

 

So, what is the correct grade for these coins? Certainly, stating that the TPG-given grade is correct has validity since the coins are liquid in these holders. However, not only do the services grade coins incorrectly at an alarming rate, the nature of the grading paradigm itself allows interpretation. Therefore, something to keep in mind might be what the value of each piece is, and not what the grade is, a concept that is alien to many collectors. I can only give my grades and share my impressions of each piece; I will not argue with people about the grades on these coins because it is likely that we cannot prove each other correct or incorrect.

[IGWT]

If I'm not careful, I might accidentally learn a lot about Walkers on these boards.

[Brotherman]

Woo-hoo! I haven’t had this much fun on the boards since my first few posts.

I follow along, even post sometimes when I see those ‘guess the grade”

threads - but they are never about circulated Walkers!!

I doubt anyone will argue with you over the grades on these.

 

Hays

 

And yes, the F 16 grade came from the Bruce Fox book.

[James_OldeTowne]

Tom, in reading through your excellent and explanatory post, I compared your thoughts to mine, and found that we are in remarkably good agreement on all the coins. This is not to pat myself on the back - not by any means - but rather I take it as encouragement that I'm really learning from you good folks on the boards about how to grade Walkers. I really was not very familiar with these coins until several months ago, when I began reading the posts of other Walker enthusiasts here on the boards.

 

Thanks to all!

 

James

[Regis44]

Tom (and all participants) thank you for this wonderful post including the thought processes and time spent writing for all our benefit. You have not only provided details about Walkers but, have included great insight on how to approach grading (surface characteristics, technical detail, and strike). I found particularly interesting Tom's surface characteristics views. Differentiating circulation scratch from modern scratch is something that never entered my mind. The leaning of individual TPGs is also interesting and I will have to see if I can recognize that.

 

Supertooth has educated and encouraged me both in the forum and with some PMs. I could not have comprehended the quality of this entire post without Bob's turtoring to this point. In other words, when I got back into the hobby last year, I could not have appreciated the nuances of this post. It is like you are taking me a giant step forward in appreciating Walkers and numismatics overall.

 

I can't thank you all enough for so generously sharing such knowledge and experience.

 

 

Regis

[CTcollector]

I am sorry I missed getting on this. Looked like a cool thread.

[HalfMad-migration]

Tom, this has been a very useful thread for a novice collector of Walkers. I have printed it out and will save it in my Walking Liberty "lesson book".

 

Many thanks to all of you who spent so much time writing such thorough replies. Extremely instructive.

Rich