Question relate to study the graded coins...

I just purchased NGC IKE 1977 MS 65, Kennedy 1995 MS 65 and PCGS Kennedy 2010 MS65. I bought them at $10 each. I am not done as I am working to get MS 66, 67 and 68. The purpose to have them is increase my knowledge in grading system by NGC and PCGS. I have Official ANA Grading Standards, but it doesn't have pictures showing details on different between numbers in MS area. It did explained the different between MS 65 and 66 or 67 and 68. However, I want to see an official's perspective by look at real clapped coins by NGC and PCGS. It will give me a better aspect on what they are looking at. However, during my thought during study on grading system. A thought popped up and I would like to ask you all on your opinion on this thought. I wonder if they may grade the coin depend on age? For example, any coins from 1995 to present, they are graded in very strict grading system. In vice verse, the older coins will grade less strict grading system than newer coins. Is that true? Do they practice that way or they grade all coins in same very strict grading system despite on their ages?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It will take many more than one comparative set to learn how to be a decent grader. Grading is so subjective and grades vary. Aside from some of the real rarities, all mint state business strike coins are graded on the same criteria, strike, contact marks and luster. Proofs are graded a bit differently since they rarely get bag marks, they are graded on strike, luster and hairlines.

 

I believe the method of the production of the coin is taken into account when they grade. For example something the mint produces today is initially far better quality than a coin that was brand new in the 1700s.
Another example would be New Orleans gold coins. For whatever reason, many are heavily abraded and came out that way initially. So they can still achieve a MS grade but many of them will not have as nice of surfaces as its Philly counterpart of the same year. But the grade may be the same.
Standards are very high for modern ASEs because they are supposed to come out, for all intents and purposes, a perfect coin.

The difference between 66 to 70 becomes nearly indistinguishable IMO. If you had 50 pro graders evaluating a set of high grade coins in that range, the grades would fall all over the place. To me a 63 to a 64 to a 65 to a 66 makes sense. It seems like real visual differences. After that, I couldnt tell you, except that a 70 will have no visible imperfections.

 

You would be better off studying one series in depth, and then applying that knowledge to the study of another series. If your "grading set" is made up of mixed coins it will be almost useless for the higher grades.

 

I agree. A mixed grading set will show you a little, but a dedicated grading set will be more influential in yoru learning. Its simply easier to see the differences in one coin, and compare every detail to each other, as well as the whole.

 

Why slabbed at all? Most collectors should be able to grade circulated examples themselves easily. If not, practice practice practice. Its a skill that has to be learned and practiced like algebra. To me, I would put together a circulated grading set raw until high AU's at the earliest. A solid date/mm set would be best, as there are variations of strike between dates, but if not maybe stick to one mint.

 

Your best option is to pick a series and learn what you can BEFORE deciding on the date/MM to establish a set with. If you already start the game knowing which years have a better strike or which years are always typically weak you will better informed to make a decision. An investment in knowledge always pays the best dividend!

 

Advice I would and could never disagree with.

 

My grading sets are mixed dates and mintmarks.

 

But are they all the same series?

 

I have several different grading sets but each set is a grading set of one series (e.g., Morgan Dollars, Peace Dollars, Buffalo Nickels, Indian Head Cents, etc.)

 

That was the main point,that if you build a set it should contain just one series in the set. I also think you will agree that someone that specializes in a single area will know the basic strike characteristics for each given year and MM. That information is very valuable when searching for the "right" coins for your collection. Most specialists would rather have a well struck coin for the given date/MM than an average one and they can command significant premiums. This can be seen in the many full struck designations such as FB, FH, FBL, FS etc. That is what I was trying to convey with discussing the date/MM for your grading set.

 

geekpryde,

Yes, for Morgans, I believe that the 1879-S, 1880-S or 1881-S would be the cheapest route if you wanted a grading set up to MS67.

 

Thank you for sharing your feedbacks and I was out all day today. I am pleased with your feedback. I will catch up tomorrow, but I want to start with GDJMSP.

GDJMSP: To answer your question, it will be difficult to grade them without magnify or it wasn't necessary? If not, then let's share my opinion on five pictures and what would it be graded by PCGS...

1. MS64
2. MS65
3. MS67
4. MS62
5. MS63

Let me know if it's close enough or way off?

 

Thanks to GDJMSP for the Morgan grading exercise

It is fun to visit shows & carefully look at the slabbed coins & then view the TPG grades. Also, I always recommend the ANA summer seminar grading classes. They are great fun.