Thread: Question regarding to grading system...

I have this thought and bother me for while. I have checked google and no luck to find information. You might know answer to it. I wonder if Mechanical Doubling will minus a point or two in grading system? For example, the overall coin's condition is cosider as MS 66-67, but it does have mechanical doubling. Will it go down to MS 64-65? Your thought on that one?

Thanks

It shouldn't have any effect on the grade. I have an 1883 with cents liberty nickel that I thought was DDO but came back noted as machine doubling on the paperwork but no notation at all on the slab itself.

Originally Posted by Aslpride

I have this thought and bother me for while. I have checked google and no luck to find information. You might know answer to it. I wonder if Mechanical Doubling will minus a point or two in grading system? For example, the overall coin's condition is cosider as MS 66-67, but it does have mechanical doubling. Will it go down to MS 64-65? Your thought on that one?

Thanks

That's a good question, and one that I have not considered before. But I would think that yes it should have a negative impact on the grade because it is a flaw. And any flaw should have a negative impact on the grade. IMO

However, the TPGs don't always see it that way when it comes to flaws imparted to the coin during the minting process. So when it comes to the TPG grade, it might have no impact at all.

Originally Posted by H8_modern

It shouldn't have any effect on the grade. I have an 1883 with cents liberty nickel that I thought was DDO but came back noted as machine doubling on the paperwork but no notation at all on the slab itself.

There never are any notations on the slab regarding "why" a coin got the numerical grade it got. Whether the assigned grade is high or low, we are always left wondering what the reasons are for the grade assigned to any coin.

Originally Posted by GDJMSP

There never are any notations on the slab regarding "why" a coin got the numerical grade it got. Whether the assigned grade is high or low, we are always left wondering what the reasons are for the grade assigned to any coin.

And that is one of my pet peeves. COnsidering the money charged for a professional grading, the least they could do is say why they graded it like they did.

I was thinking about it for a while too. I agree with Doug that it should have, and I think it does have to have an affect at a certain point. I hate TPGers, (ask anyone), and dislike their assumptions, but I seriously doubt they would label a coin with mechanical doubling as a 70. If that is the case, then its a question at what grade does it prohibit going higher? My guess, (and its only a guess), would be around 67 or 68. At 67 there is quite a bit of stuff acceptable for lower grades that will keep it from achieving a 67, and this may be another.

My reasoning is there are many tiny things the mint did wrong that will stop a coin from being a 70. If those are enough to stop it being 70 and "perfect", then something as dramatic has to prevent a 70 I would think.

Now, true doubling I think could be a 70, since its accurately coining what is on the die.

Again just my opinion.

Chris

As a rule I would not expect it to lower the grade except that I would expect it to keep an otherwise perfect coin from receiving a 70 grade.

Originally Posted by medoraman

Now, true doubling I think could be a 70, since its accurately coining what is on the die.

Again just my opinion.

Chris

While I understand your reasoning for that comment, I disagree. here's why.

Your reasoning is that because the doubling is on the die that it should not affect the grade. But what about things like rust on the die ? That damages the die, thus it creates a flaw on the coin. Or things like die gouges or die scratches, those things also damage the die. Or die cracks, or die chips, or die breaks, or even excessive die polish marks - those things without a doubt damage the die. And in every single case the dies impart that same damage (in mirror effect) to the coins.

So imagine, you have two coins that are equal in regard to luster, contact marks or the lack thereof, quality of strike (in a general sense), eye appeal (again in a general sense), hairlines or the lack thereof, - but one of the coins has a die crack or a die scratches.

Should those 2 coins be graded the same ?

Since one of the coins has a flaw that the other does not have, I would have to say that they cannot be graded the same. Nor should they be. To do otherwise defies all logic.

Hello everyone, I appreciate your input on my question. That's very good question regarding professional grading that they should included explanation for reason of final graded. I can agree with mint defective shouldn't get higher grade.

I am a comic collection for over 22 years and I did ask few questions to comic professional grading and they did confirm that any print defective cause by machine will subtract .5 to 1 point from overall grade. Many people did complain to CGC comic grader company. It's same company as NGC. People complaint regarding that the comic is nearly perfect, but receive low graded point. They forgot to look inside to see if it has any print defective. Print defective can contained hole by printer grabber, print smear, wrong color ink, etc. It does effect the final graded point.

I wondering if coin professional grading will do same on coins with mechanical defective? I hope we can find straight answer from professional grading regarding to this question.

Originally Posted by GDJMSP

While I understand your reasoning for that comment, I disagree. here's why.

Your reasoning is that because the doubling is on the die that it should not affect the grade. But what about things like rust on the die ? That damages the die, thus it creates a flaw on the coin. Or things like die gouges or die scratches, those things also damage the die. Or die cracks, or die chips, or die breaks, or even excessive die polish marks - those things without a doubt damage the die. And in every single case the dies impart that same damage (in mirror effect) to the coins.

So imagine, you have two coins that are equal in regard to luster, contact marks or the lack thereof, quality of strike (in a general sense), eye appeal (again in a general sense), hairlines or the lack thereof, - but one of the coins has a die crack or a die scratches.

Should those 2 coins be graded the same ?

Since one of the coins has a flaw that the other does not have, I would have to say that they cannot be graded the same. Nor should they be. To do otherwise defies all logic.

The difference to me sir is that true doubling was present the moment the die was made. We simply do not know if maybe the person making the die intended to double the image or not. I would say the same with ovedates and the like. They are present on new, pristine dies, so the mint had every intention of making that coin like that, (management withstanding). Now, a cracked die, rusted die, wobbly die, (creating machine doubling), etc are mechanical imperfections that hypothetically were not intended, and were imperfections in the system and were not on purpose.

So, to my mind, a 1918/7 quarter, doubled die 1844 half, or 1942/1 dime should all be capable of being a 70, but 3 legged buffalos, coins struck from rusted dies, 22 plain cent, coins with die polish lines, weakly struck coins, etc should not.

Just my opinion and would completely understand if others disagree with it. To me the moment the die is created and put into service is the "official" coin the mint is attempting to make.

I understand your point Chris, but even a doubled die is still a flaw. Why ? Because the master die and the working hub was not doubled, only the working die was.

I think you have to look at the totality of the coin. If the doubling is so distracting as to knock it down a grade, so be it, but I can't think of an example that would be so except perhaps in 70 grade. I'd really have to see the coin to make a judgement.

That said, in 67 I'd not give mechanical doubling a second thought if I really liked the coin. Remember, it's about the COIN not the grade...Mike

Originally Posted by Leadfoot

I think you have to look at the totality of the coin. If the doubling is so distracting as to knock it down a grade, so be it, but I can't think of an example that would be so except perhaps in 70 grade. I'd really have to see the coin to make a judgement.

That said, in 67 I'd not give mechanical doubling a second thought if I really liked the coin. Remember, it's about the COIN not the grade...Mike

Well I have a half cent that is BU, (idk maybe a 65, I never graded it but its nice), but has mechanical doubling on the reverse. I think this is common on these. Its severe enough I would have never second guessed a TPG if I had it graded and they knocked it down some. If I were still into US coins I probably would have traded it off by now, and I hate trading coins.

You are of course right that the total coin has to be looked at.

Originally Posted by GDJMSP

I understand your point Chris, but even a doubled die is still a flaw. Why ? Because the master die and the working hub was not doubled, only the working die was.

What about in cases where the master was doubled? Some 1972 Lincolns or the 1943 Walkers as examples? Are these coins not technically "flawed" too? While I cannot argue with (and actually agree with) most of your points, where is the line drawn?

Originally Posted by BooksB4Coins

What about in cases where the master was doubled? Some 1972 Lincolns or the 1943 Walkers as examples? Are these coins not technically "flawed" too? While I cannot argue with (and actually agree with) most of your points, where is the line drawn?

I don't know that there is a line drawn. I am merely presenting my thoughts on the subject. But you can go quite a ways back from working dies. First you have the master hub and then you have the master die. Then you have working hubs, and then you have working dies. So there's 3 places for mistakes like doubling to occur. But it cannot occur on the master hub. So if there is a line to be drawn, that's where it would be.

What I do know is the TPGs seem to grade coins with any of the flaws I mentioned as if the flaws were not even there.

Originally Posted by GDJMSP

I don't know that there is a line drawn. I am merely presenting my thoughts on the subject. But you can go quite a ways back from working dies. First you have the master hub and then you have the master die. Then you have working hubs, and then you have working dies. So there's 3 places for mistakes like doubling to occur. But it cannot occur on the master hub. So if there is a line to be drawn, that's where it would be.

What I do know is the TPGs seem to grade coins with any of the flaws I mentioned as if the flaws were not even there.

For an MS-70 coin with no apparent flaws, how can one be certain that it is struck with the exact relief intended by the master die? If the working die is striking coins with a relief slightly less than what is intended, how does a TPG handle that?