Unfair Guess the Grade - 1799 Bust Dollar - How Should This Coin Be Graded?

[@kevinpoggensee3044]

Reverse is definitely a xf 45. Obverse I would call vf20. I think overall it should grade somewhere in the middle, perhaps vf30 .Much nicer than a 15 as the eye appeal is awesome.

[@MorganHoard]

I am in a 100% agreement.

[@ChrisRalph]

That is AWESOME! I have the twin brother of that 1799 dollar with the die crack from side to side on the reverse. I think mine has very slightly less wear and some minor differences of strike. The E which has the top obliterated on the reverse of your coin is clear on mine with even a few denticles above it. I have slightly more detail in Liberty's hair on the obverse. Mine may be a little earlier strike of the same die pair. Mine has dark toning over the whole coin enough that the reflectivity seen on your coin is not visible. It is raw and ungraded, but I graded it F on the obverse and EF on the reverse - it should be EF for the whole coin. I purchased mine recently on eBay for $850. Thanks for showing your coin and discussing it in this video.

[@rgives1870]

I love when dealers say a coin has a particular grade "all day long". It should be all day long, except the day that PCGS graded it. I graded this one VF-20, with the reverse bringing up the grade a lot to get there.

[@MVPCustomCues]

VF35. I started much higher and kept dropping. I don't think it is as flatly struck as I first considered it. The E on the left, ribbon end and M on the right, upper breast of eagle, and the tail feathers formed a triangle of wear due to those points being unusually high as a result of the die crack. Edges of wings and parts of clouds were the next highest points that eventually got wear. It doesn't make sense that those areas were flatly struck when other areas are significantly sharp for 1799, so considerable wear was imparted on the coin, just not in enough areas on the reverse to make it quickly obvious. OK. Well. I understand your point about you grade a coin based on what is left. I agree but when you look at what is left on the reverse, I think you have to look at what is left in the high points. It is too unusual of a situation to look at what is left in the lower areas and simply like what you see. If you look at the ribbon tip on the right or the eagle immediately below the die crack, those are not wear spots that you would see on an EF coin. That is too much evidence to ignore and assume the obverse looks the way it does because of excessive flat strike. You can attribute some of it to that, but not as much as you want to IMO. After seeing the obverse, I think VF 20 through VF30 are reasonable grades. F15 is harsh.

[@jeemalsoknownasjimhawkins1294]

OK, Ben, before I see the final grade, I would say: Observe: VF25 Reverse: XF 45. OK, now I am going to look: WTF! No way!!! Well, I hope you see it to someone who wants a great coin. Cheers.

[@TheQuickSilver101]

I get that striking matters in grading but man they really missed the boat there. Coins struck back then are never fully crisp and clear. There's always flatness at some point on those coins. They're a grading company and they should know this. Maybe kicking it back to VF for the flatness on the front would be sensible, but a Fine? Give me a break. Thanks for sharing that with us!

[@stevedietrich8936]

I think the reverse looks great for a 220 year old coin, I would think it would be XF 45. The obverse is pretty worn, probably VF20 at best. I think they are going to pimp you and give you a VF 20 overall.

[@CrustyWhiteBread]

Wow. Beautiful coin. Perfect example of why you buy the coin and not the slab. Dream coin of mine. One day.

[@MarkB3h]

I love the coin. The knowledgeable collectors here know more about grading than I. Two factors stand out for me as heavily weighted by PCGS: obverse appearance and sight unseen standard. The detail and luster are beautiful. The coin is a time machine. Thanks Ben, great video.

[@TheCoinGeek]

Thanks

[@aid8880]

​@@TheCoinGeek مساء الخير سيدي عندي نفس العمله اريد البيع تقييم NGC

[@jamesgoss1860]

10:15 I would add that the GRADE RECEIVED is also a guide, and not scripture. I've seen plenty of MS62 coins that have better eye appeal than MS65, etc, and obviously the grades themselves are just as fickle as the suggested prices attached to those grades. Buy what you think looks the best and pay what you feel it is worth. Everything else will sort itself out.

[@classiccoins1485]

Yes I believe there should be some discussion on what should be designated on the holder or cert page that can more accurately describe the condition of the coin. Ben let's get a coin grading company started and grade coins how we want them to be described.

[@DevonianDave]

I had the reverse in the XF45/AU50 range and the obverse F15/VF20. I figured they would give it a VF20 overall.

[@Ryguy916]

I'm currently in this boat too w/ my 1803 Bust $ in Vf20

[@richardmetcalf2346]

You got me! I would have never have guessed. I only know how to tell the difference between a circulated from UNC. I would have thought that coin deserves a better grade though!

[@ad2902]

The draped bust coinage is the hardest to get for the typeset. I'm working on a true US type set 1798 to current. Having looked at a bunch of bust dollars with a slabbed xf 45 in my type set the reverse is high AU all day. It's very hard to identify the high points because of the way they struck they all wear differently.

[@alanbellkey4592]

Hey I’ve watched quite a few of your videos I agree with you and this is the first time I’ve ever looked at the owl behind you that’s made out of axle bearings and stuff that’s pretty cool

[@robertlung2222]

I have a 1799 bust dollar in a OLD ANA Holder that has a beautiful die Crack on the reverse and detail is not bad. Obverse has less detail than the reverse with a pin scratch on Liberty''s face. It is noticeable but the coin is graded F12. I thought about getting it crossed over to a PCGS Holder but I like it just the way it is. One of my 1st big purchases over 1000 dollars. With the "JUICE" I Payed a round 1150 bucks. It's HISTORY IMO even with that pin scratch

[@frankchase9297]

Thanks for the tutorial. Best Regards!

[@nicolasmorabito7950]

I think PCGS leans very heavily on “sight unseen” grading. That being said, it’s definitely a VF 20 coin at minimum, maybe closer to a VF25-VF30 and it should be priced accordingly. An educated buyer looking at this coin will know how the value will appreciate and will pay VF25 money.

[@kevinhoock9742]

The Hair missing (Obverse ) VF 15 Reverse XF 35 But the money shot is the Obverse VF 15-20

[@tylonnplatinumthe3rd659]

I’m gonna say the reverse is vf25 but I’m guessing the obverse is poorly struck so it’s a f15 overall

[@tylonnplatinumthe3rd659]

Wow I nailed it! I have to disagree on this one Ben. One would have to assume that all coins start at 70 and depending on the amount of handling go down from there for that to make sense. As you know all coins prior to what 1970 or so start at 69 or less with many coming fresh off the press at 63/64 range. They are docking this coin big time for strike quality and somewhat unfair imo. Xf is a big stretch but I wouldn’t have a issue if they called it a 25 or 30

[@donaldinnewmexico]

Hi, Ty. I graded the same as you. Most graded it higher. Brilliant minds... *TYUx2*

[@tylonnplatinumthe3rd659]

Haha spot on my guy!!

[@johnskujins8870]

I've never seen that much detail on the eagle's head. That eyeball is amazing. I still think it's AU.

[@tim1883]

The draped bust series is famous for flat spots. I have an 1807 half that is just like that.

[@vintagesanctuary]

Guess based on reverse at the 3:38 video point: Strong XF45, maybe AU50.

[@samiam7]

Not enough knowledge on it to have an opinion. But I do love the coin, and enjoy getting a closeup look, with some interesting and insightful commentary.

[@timber72]

F12 . (

[@timber72]

Edited to add: this was "guess what PCGS graded it", not "guess what grade it SHOULD have gotten. It's a nice VF25-35. The obverse is obviously not worn so much as weakly struck. The pool of luster below her ear is evidence of that. Natural wear would have obliterated that centuries ago.

[@fifteenbyfive]

I was thinking XF (or XF Details because "unfair") until I saw the bust. Then I got confused and realized I didn't know what its grade is. When I saw the surprising grade it's almost like PCGS weighed the coin and graded it by mass instead of the quality of the vast majority of its surface area. It's an interesting coin. Good video.

[@georgecoker4933]

It would be instructive to compare this example with other examples of this same variety - with the big reverse die crack. I agree that, in the end, it is the market that decides what a coin is worth. That being said, a knowledgeable collector is different from a collector that only pays a lot of attention to the price guides. The knowledgeable collector realizes the striking characteristics of the coins that they collect. As a small time dealer I've sold several coins that were undergraded in the holder but the knowledgeable collector was more that willing to pay up to get them.

[@asheland_numismatics]

That goes to show the obverse basically makes the grade. My Turban Head $10 is similar. Worn obverse and crisp reverse.

[@silvadelshaladin]

Now if it were the other way -- the obverse being like the reverse and the reverse as the obverse, it probably would have received a higher grade. The reverse is definitely better than the obverse, even counting for the anomalies. That said I gave it a VF-25. Note also that the grading standards for coins 1807 and back are much laxer than more recent coins. Grading is in a lot of ways to protect people from getting messed up when buying coins sight unseen. I know this happens a bit less often in recent history with the advent of the smartphone and the reduction in data costs for pictures. I would be upset if I bought that coin as an XF.

[@jamesgoss1860]

I figured it was a XF, maybe high VF on a bad day. The striking back then was a mixed bag. The grade it received was outrageous.

[@anthonyschultz1510]

I was in the same boat as you. I was thinking XF40! You see these draped busts with obvious defects/damage/scratches receiving straight grades. Hell, there’s draped busts that show signs of cleaning that come back as straight grades. Did not expect F15 at all

[@gilbertojesusferrazferraz315]

Hello Ben 👍👍

[@TheCoinGeek]

👋🏼

[@aid8880]

​@@TheCoinGeek مساء الخير عندي نفس العمله 1799 1804مقيمه NGC

[@NefariousEnough]

It's a lowish VF something because of the edge wear and flat features. The holder is no better than a D+. Whoa!! Surprised at F15.😱

[@ProKarate]

Agreed 100% with you. Why penalize a coin's grade based on the production activity at the US Mint.

[@silverlover5817]

Thanks for the video.........

[@troyb.4101]

55 almost uncirculated split die is making some of the striking off! XF45 on the front! 50 over all!

[@jrduke45]

At first I said XF 40 but after seeing the obverse I dropped to VF 35 but that weakness I belive is from that die break, not circulation. Split grading would come in handy on this one. I cant believe at a minimum they didnt give it a VF grade.

[@leesanders6490]

IF I wanted the coin, I would be willing to give XF40 money for it. It's a XF45 all day long in my mind not because of any perceived wear because the coin is a freak in that regard but because of the luster that's still present. I love that coin.

[@doughensley6202]

Reverse xf40 obverse vf30. Drapery nicer than fine. Think uneven strike. Hense vf30 obverse. Wanted to say vf35 but flat hair made me say vf30

[@Jackthgun]

Before the reveal XF details smoth surfaces

[@dougm.370]

Hey Ben, remember seeing my PCGS 1805 25C B.1 F15? We both agreed it was a VF coin but they did the same thing to you and gave it a Fine grade. Seems like they are grading primarily on Obverse then reverse. If I look at your coin based on, I see it is a grade you don't see in modern coin because yours is what I call a EF48 based on strike and luster and you are right is the grade should be based on what is left and detail of design from striking. I really think they don't know how to properly grade these coins due to their wonky strikes that makes it look like ware but it's just weak strikes and flawed dies giving it a false grade. If they can determine the Variety B-22 BB-168 how can they not see what we all see? OH yeah because this coin in higher than a VF30 would give you TOP POP in this variety hummmm Also if you go under this variety and look at their VF30 PICS with same die issues yours is much better just look 1799 $1 B-22 BB-168 (Regular Strike) Draped Bust Dollar - PCGS CoinFacts

[@Ontario100]

Reverse strike and overall look is XF/AU in my opinion. The obverse, looks like a poor strike with some circulation wear. I would grade the coin VF 35 . I agree F-15 is too low. Thanks!

[@bluemule3891]

Percentage of material left vs luster, luster looses. It's a carumba.

[@powerpit48]

I would give it EF40. I am told I am too conservative when grading.

[@musicstuff698]

I guessed a F15 after I saw the details on the bust just cause it’s a heavy net grade. Almost like a Vf35 reverse and a VG10 obverse.. strange

[@donaldinnewmexico]

Hi, Ben. The reverse looks VF25. I'm going off the high points. The obverse looks F15. I love you, Ben. PCGS hates you. *TYU*

[@CertifiedPre33]

I agree with this... reverse vf25, obverse f15... could have called it vf20

[@jackfrost6611]

Another great video

[@TheSteveBoyd]

Hey! I was close!

[@erikbrantner4295]

Additionally, not so sure why the front side of this coin was so weak, Could be due to strike,state of the obverse die, possibly grease filled die? Don't believe it's a wear issue but All the same, this coin could be issued a split grand with an overall VF 25 grade regardless of what ever caused the weakness of one side....

[@yamaha226]

Fine 12.

[@timelapse4989]

the back. i give it VF25.

[@Cturnerwrite]

I chickened out and gave it a F20, but I wanted to give it an EF 40

[@rogermueller9143]

i thought au. i agree with you.if it was a 33 double eagle they would change their tune.

[@coreynagle804]

I am on my phone so I cant see the best is that a die crack on the reverse?

[@coreynagle804]

i am also at work so my full attention is not on the coin

[@rgives1870]

I wonder if you sent it in raw and did the variety attribution if the grade might be different. It would at least get a look by someone who is more familiar with die varieties and die states.

[@michaelp772]

Obverse: EF40 due to poor strike. Net grade: EF40 or 45.

[@sob1994]

Reverse looks vf35 Obverse f15-20

[@TheSteveBoyd]

They grade the strike, though. Otherwise, there would be no Franklin FBL, Merc FB, no DMPL on Morgans, etc.. right?

[@erikbrantner4295]

Judging by the reverse only, And my decades of experience, Could conservatively call that a high end EF45+.

[@Socialyote7524]

Very fine at least

[@JohnD357]

OK, I'll bite. Stopped the video to guess. I'm guessing XF-45. OK, after seeing the grade, this is definitely a need for split grading. The obverse center clearly had a bad strike because of that reverse die crack.

[@johncouch7785]

The coin is XF45, the reverse of this coin defines the wear amount

[@tomsacchetti7703]

Wow. 20-25

[@melvinvillafuerte1784]

I have 1 piece of that coin 1799 found when I dig

[@everettwhite9874]

Reverse AU 50 Obverse VF 30

[@louissicajr]

They're grading it low because they don't want to have to buy it back if it downgrades. But yeah unfortunately you'll never get an upgrade because I'm sure they'll recognize that coin forever.

[@johnskujins8870]

AU58 based on reverse.

[@josefigueroa3930]

Beautiful coin I thought it was AU😅

[@josevarjas8263]

Xf 40 reverse. Vf25 obverse

[@numismaticsanonymous4952]

So unfair... on a badly struck coin I think surface preservation and luster should weigh more heavily than "what's missing" on a typical circulated coin. I was going to guess VF35.

[@667hodge]

In other words,they only grade the obverse.Valuable, nonetheless

[@stevemontanya7421]

PCGS AU58 !!

[@othmanbabait9600]

I have one piece dollars 1799 and 1803

[@jppagetoo]

Before you show anything here is my asessment. That dollar is strange. If it was a Morgan or later I would doubt it's authenticity. There are all kinds of raised metal bubbles on the surface that would indicate a cast copy. But it is in a PCGS holder so I know it has to be genuine.The dies must have been rusted besides being cracked.

[@ineedhelpsoon]

VF25 Edit: ok Fine 15?!?! Wtf? XD Seems like NGC is starting to be the best way to go...

[@marshallprice8503]

obverse fine?

[@kokloyyap7069]

Do you have this coin and have see this coin up to now or video of this coin

[@texasjoe557]

xf40 reverse F12 obverse- maybe f15 but prolly closer to f12

[@texasjoe557]

Now that I see the grade my f12 was spot on, and the stronger reverse may have been the reason it went to F15. I don't agree with you when you say, let them grade extra fine and let buyer and seller decide on price- especially since the buyer is relying on PCGS's grade to discover fair value for the coin. You have it at XF, 2 grades higher with the obverse in F12 condition-- seems too optimistic. The luster is a bonus but not one that would get me past an F15-VF20 price for the coin. The coin is definitely controversial so perhaps it is an avoid for those who wish to resell it. Just my 18 months of experience talking here (not much experience) but I have bought and sold property my whole life and feel like I know how to avoid risk by buying it right or walking away given the coin is controversial with the attitude of why force myself into a difficult position, if there is no compelling reason to do so. Enjoyed it CG!

[@michaelm7843]

Very funny - Pick a coin that's basically impossible to grade and then let the fun begin. Current grading systems do not have the complexity to handle a coin like this.

[@scottcahala7779]

That was a much better coin. Then it was graded. A lot of the flatness was the strike. In my opinion.

[@allancolegrove7003]

Fine 45

[@sticksandstones5372]

Total 50

[@kokloyyap7069]

Only this model but l another one model some to now never see 1this coin inside have a small small shining2 ring 2 this coin inside have a small small 🐦 on the eagle hand 3 another side hand can see a house

[@originalatogscoins]

Wow, definitely under graded!!

[@Santa6968]

I'd say au 50 on the rev

[@Santa6968]

And probably xf 45 in the obv

[@ericanderson8556]

45 rev

[@jasonhastings5538]

Should not even have a number grade!! Theres so many things going on with it to really put a number on it!!!

[@ragulanyogarajah1632]

Have anyone seen 1799 coin missing shield?

[@LarryStendebach]

That is a silly grade. It's a vf not a fine. Good video.

[@garyvickers9474]

I guess My Silverdollar must be a fake because it does not look like that but it sounds like a real one. It weighs 29 g so I do not know if it’s fake or not.

[@MrENT18]

Im guessing XF 45

[@jasonhastings5538]

1800!!!😬😬😬😬 That coin is different thats forsure!!! To me its over graded!!! It should have never been let out the mint door, but we talkin 200 years ago!!!

[@stevemontanya7421]

Same year coin my friend bought with a hole $150 , then fixed it sold for $900 @ auction. Good show thank you.

[@TheSteveBoyd]

F12

[@jderic5747]

XF 45

[@tomfeldbruegge8744]

I hit the grade rite on the head. Through ANA grading standards pcgs put a market grade on it (or value) Technically I do agree with an XF grade but market grade at F15. Thanks Ben enjoy your videos.

[@robertprestonsr2453]

At least they gave you the Bowers-Brochard Die types... There might be some extra rarity value there.. I have leant out my copy of the Encyclopedia of Early Silver Dollars or else I could comment on the rarity of those Dies... In any event, it is the weakness of the dies which results in the lack of denticles/reading on the edges...(not a detraction in my view) To me, an important part of the "value" of these early silver dollars MUST take into account the striking process which went on at the Philadelphia Mint in those days... What is of interest to me is the "crude" quality of the strike which was common on coins from those early days... From my point of view, these guys, the coin graders, are simply not expert enough in the history and quality of these early silver dollars... David Bowers would far better be able to appreciate this coin than the cooks at any of the grading services... their opinions on silver coins which pre-date the Morgans are of no value to me...(unless we agree, of course..)

[@timber72]

What always amazes me is how poor quality our coinage was, when compared to French and British coinage of the same era, and even private coinage/tokens/medals made in the United States. You look at the quality of contemporaneous output, such as the Libertas Americana medal, and it's night and day. It's like the government didn't want to...or couldn't...spend anything on engravers or equipment or technicians or anything. Obviously, the skill and technology existed...but it wouldn't be until the 1830s that the US Mint really got its act together.

[@robertprestonsr2453]

@@timber72 You are so right in this observation... The evolution of the mint's quality is directly related to the evolution of growing streams of wealth in this new nation state... and in my view, the story of, especially, the first attempts of silver dollar coinage is totally fascinating...and yes, as you mentioned, the government DID NOT have enough money in 1794 to make quality coins... The first 2000 ounces of silver were DONATED to the mint and then the 1550 coins produced and minted... (approx. 450 of the first blanks created were too light and underweight-- which lead to the category of "mint plugs" for flowing hair silver dollars) and then the minted coins were pretty much delivered back to the man who donated them... It is also claimed that Thomas Jefferson donated silver to help get the mint started, in part because the mint just couldn't afford to buy any... Also, personally, I would love to acquire a 1794 Flowing Hair Silver Dollar, especially one in "fairly poor" quality...

[@marshallprice8503]

first side xf

[@heartoftexas8092]

Graders are not detectives, your lucky if they do their normal job.

[@gotboost1433]

Rim damage