Featured Market Grading vs. Technical Grading

I don't feel as if it is productive for me to get involved in the grading argument any more. Obviously, I will continue to post threads, and respond to ones that I like. Moreover, I shall continue posting acquisitions, and coins that I like for discussion purposes. However, the debate over the "validity" of TPG grading gets to be so partisan here, it really isn't pleasant or productive in my opinion. I've made my feelings known, so no more needs to be said in that area. Everybody who has read grading threads knows that I believe TPGs are very accurate, with occasional mistakes (like any other business that deals with the public in a third party capacity). So, no reason to get knickers in a twist with arguments that can't be won or lost here.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

...knickers, knickers, ...let me see if you're not breaking any forum rules. Is that a word from a 50's TV show?

 

Gee, I don't know, Ward. Why don't you ask the Beaver. He's up on the slang of the day.

 

I wasn't active in the hobby back then, could you elaborate ?

I am aware of the Coin Bubble that took place and during such times its normal to see something like grading go a bit below normal standards. However, that's different than saying standards went out the window...so when you say you saw "nice" and "ugly" coins for the grade...are you implying you saw coins misgraded by 2-3 grades ?

I understand this is why CAC came into existence but I myself felt that since grading was subjective...and since even experienced collectors disagree on grades...and since even 3 graders at PCGS/NGC can disagree in a room (presumably by no more than 1 notch)...I never understood the concern regarding the A-B-C distinction that CAC referenced.

Unless a coin is CLEARLY 1 or 2 or more grades too high (or too low), not sure the Nice vs. Ugly distinction is enough to tarnish the hobby as much as overpriced merchandise, counterfeits, proliferation of Proofs/Reverse Proofs/etc. and other supply increases.

JMHO

 

Wow, guys. I just read this whole thread end to end in one sitting. Some observations:

1) Charges that CT moderators are throwing their weight around by ending every argument with references to their resumes and whipping out the CT Rule Book? (religious capitalization for sarcasm reasons) "Say it ain't so, Joe." Sounds eerily familiar to me. It's largely why I'm seldom here.

1a) Numismatists, especially those of us of a certain age and experience (I'm 59, and I've been collecting for 52 of those years.) are used to being the "smartest guy in the room". When a whole room (actual or virtual) of SGIR types get together, egos start rubbing up against one another REAL fast.

1b) Let's not get into numismatic resume "you know what" measuring debates, okay? I'm an ANA National Volunteer and regular Board of Governors meeting contributor and one of Pennsylvania's _2_ Numismatic Points of Light named by ANA Prez Walt Ostromecki. We ALL have our resumes. I _GIVE TO_ the numismatic hobby writ large (time, treasure); I don't take much from it any more.

2) On the substance: I swear to the deity that the latest version of the Official ANA Grading Standards for United States Coins book (7th edition - the one that renders ALL the previous ones obsolete and pointless, BTW) contains, WITHIN ITS OWN PAGES, numerous caveats about slavishly following what is admittedly their "technical" grading standards. The ANA has "bought in fully" to market grading, as should we.

I particularly point you to chapters entitled, "Grading: Importance and Evolution" {Just sit there a minute and let that word "evolution" sink in a bit}, "Advanced Grading Techniques" {which is to distinguish it from an earlier chapter using the modifier "Basic"}, and "Closer Focus on Certain Aspects of Grading". Why do we wax so nostalgically poetic about technical grading when the people who wrote the book (literally wrote the book) don't themselves fully believe in it any more?

3) Market grading HAD TO replace technical grading. It was inevitable. Why? Because we have come to a place where AU55-58 coins are selling for more than MS60-62 coins under technical grading standards. That made for a nonsensical system. AU58 coins tend to be beautiful. MS61 coins tend to be "ugly stick" victims. The entirety of the 58-62 range is in total flux. Grading should not be about counting ticks and bag marks, and it had become so under technical grading. A higher grade number MUST equal a higher value. Nothing slabbed years ago that is within 55-63 grades is relevant any more. Your old 58's now need to be 61's or 62's, and maybe vice versa, too. Remember - it's now "okay" to engage in, wait for it, ... "evolution". See? If the market values Coin A more than Coin B OF A PARTICULAR SERIES / DATE / MINT MARK, then Coin A needs to have a higher grade than Coin B, minor rubs or bag marks be da(rned). {almost broke a rule.}

 

Kurt, great post and welcome. Some comments:

I think the Mods have been OK, even when some of them have been on the opposite side of the debate. Lots of back-and-forth, but no uncivil words or threats to lock a thread, etc.

Yup....

Glad to know the book is The Source, as I just bought it.

I think I asked that question a few pages back, great minds think alike ?

We discussed this, too, great point.

Personal preference has to play a role too, right ? I do NOT like toned coins as a rule, so if I am buying a Morgan I want it pristine frosty white. But more people than me DO like them, so what to me is undesirable or maybe 3 grades lower is for them something worth paying-up for.

I learned alot from Lehigh and GD on the High-AU's vs. Low-MS's debate. It is fascinating, but if the price of the AUs do not MATERIALLY exceed the low-60's MS's, you could say it is an anomaly based on a 'quirk' of the grading scale. But for the most part, and for most coins, low-MS coins do look better than high-AUs. Maybe not for all sizes of coins (i.e., Morgans and Saints) but then again it's tough to write rules for hundreds of coins and not have any outliers.

 

Oh man, don't get me started on toning! I'll get in rules trouble, because I can't discuss the toning fetish (either way - blast white OR worshipping toning) without cussing a blue streak!

I maintain more money is being thrown away chasing the toning fetish than on any other part of numismatics. No one understands toning is my theory. Toning is about chemistry and physics (particularly wave interference physics) and that's too much like real work for most coin people.

For example, how many "Professional Numismatists" do you suspect know that thiourea can either add or remove toning from a silver coin depending on whether an acid or base is paired with it? "Almost none" is the correct answer. I put Professional Numismatists in air quotes above because even if you make a living in coins and DON'T know this, you STILL don't deserve the title Professional.

How many know that Eastman Kodak published a formula for cleaning darkroom towels that can be used as a coin dip that is 10,000x gentler to coin surfaces than e-Z-est is? Just you, me, and anybody else who reads this.

 

I think you would be surprised by how many posters here hold advanced degrees in fields that would qualify them as experts on this subject.

 

No joke, there are seriously a bunch of nerds on this forum. Can't believe that I actually posted the Periodic Table in a different thread today! I gave myself a penalty for excessive nerdiness right after, I swear!

 

You too?

Money isn't thrown away, it just goes from one pocket to another. That's why this fetish is here and will never go away, too much easy money in it.

 

Well that was an interesting visit Mr.Bellman! I never understood people that would pay large prices for common date toned Morgans or what not but i learned along time ago its their choice and if their happy great. If everybody liked the same things what a boreing world it would be and i have seen some amazing toned coins the owners were very happy in the end thats what matters just like some like their coins graded and slabbed i am one of them and others do not.

 

Well ill tell u on

Thing this way..u people say in the day if u know a crook dealer u never go back to him. Correct?, then why do u people give TPGs the pass?

 

Think^

 

They have muddied the waters..once something is fixed leave it alone. TPGs are a business...biased to the volume dealers and have vested interests. Next thing to come..holders made from PM? But as with any good marketing tools and fancy campaigns, a bill of goods have been sold.

 

Do you want me to correct your thinking or grammar?

 

I'll settle for just an interpretation of what he said.

 

Older thread, but I got my money's worth.