How much hairlining is acceptable on MS coins?

Well, gold coins are still different, in all grading aspects.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I was specifically referring to die polish

 

Yup, die polish, not Shinola.

 

So what is the answer to the question posed in the title of this thread? I am seeing a whole bunch of “there is no set rule” and “set standards are bad for the hobby” and “the standard is always moving.” It’s very hard for me (or anyone for that matter) to learn about this area of grading if it is as ambiguous and arbitrary as everyone is making it sound.

 

The answer is there is no answer. You can choose your favorite published guide, but they are going to say things like "light, scattered hairlines", or "a few hairlines" or "numerous hairlines." The interpretation of what that means is up to you, or whoever is grading the coin. And that interpretation is subjective (its an opinion), and it will gradually shift over time.

What you'll find is that there are some coins that most of us will agree on a grade (within a point or two), and there are some coins that we will disagree on. It is a subjective opinion. It kinda sucks that this is the best answer we can give you, but that's the way it is.

 

Hey, I'm just proud you are asking instead of telling. As for your answer, I don't collect $3 Gold and have no idea what is acceptable with respect to hairlines.

 

Really, it depends on who you ask. Now, since you are referencing PCGS graded coins, you should ask them. Silly answer, right?

Yet, PCGS did release their "Official Guide" to the public. The first edition was in 1996, with the second following in 2004. The Coin Show did a book recommendation on the second edition.

When we look at page 26 of the 1st Edition, PCGS answers your question with one word: Numerous. On page 11, they warn that hairlines may be caused through mishandling of the coin and that the "impairment may be so serious, in fact, that the coin will no longer qualify for a Mint State grade."

Pretty ambiguous, eh? So, if "numerous" hairlines can still exist on an MS coin, but it will no longer be considered MS when the impairment becomes "so serious", when exactly does this occur?

When we finally get to page 41 (and the inference is made in many other places in the book leading up to this point), we see our answer under the header for Mishandling: "If there is no discoloration and the luster is still intact with only very slight breaks, the coin still will be considered Uncirculated." (hint: wear is usually identifiable through discoloration...so when it mocks wear!)

Let people disagree all they want. With regards to the specific coins you referenced, there is PCGS's take on the subject. Agree or disagree, it really does not matter. Grading is subjective!

Too many people tout that mantra, yet very few of them practice it. Too many times people try to shove their own subjectivity down other's throat. It really only matters when just the two of us want to buy/sell with each other. At that point, we come to a compromise on the grade and accept a deal, or find another that will.

You have seen a whole bunch of “there is no set rule” and “set standards are bad for the hobby” and “the standard is always moving.” because of this subjectivity. You were the one who asked, afterall.


Edit:
I think I should add just one post script here: If the hairlines are caused by harsh cleaning, PCGS will not grade the coin. This is much worse than a simple MS/AU question when this occurs. This is plain and simple surface damage that makes the coin extremely undesirable for many.

 

I'm not. I'm pushing back against the claim that there are no standards that some people keep pushing or that the standards are completely random. There are standards, there have always been standards since coin collecting started, and there will continue to be standards in the future.

Ever since coin collecting started thousands of years ago there have been standards and ways of evaluating quality/grading them and throughout the entire time they have continued to change and evolve.

A lot of people pushing these ideas that newer people seem to buy into that its all just whatever they feel like and there's no standards learned to grade decades ago and just want things to remain static for what they know. I would be concerned if grading hadn't changed at all in the last 30-50 years, that just means we stopped learning and evolving and that's a scary thought to just get set in one way and do it that way forever.

If you aren't constantly re-educating yourself, relearning, and sharpening your skills you become irrelevant and everything has already passed you by. You say having to re-educate yourself like it's a bad thing yet it isn't, it's exactly what you should be doing anyway.

So yes grading will continue to change overtime. As for hairlines and everything else it really is you know it when you see it. How visible are they, how much to do they jump, what other redeeming qualities does the coin have that may save it ect. With gold it will even vary by the series, is it a normal gold coin or one of the Indians where everything is flipped ect. Then you have the branch mints as well when it comes to gold like C and D. There is A LOT of specialization in the older gold world with a lot of varying qualities of minting. It can be very easy to get mint issues confused with what would be a details coin if it was a normal silver coin when someone isn't familiar with the nuances of the various gold series

 

Those are scratches from mishandling!

A coin that is completely hairlined from cleaning can still be graded MS by a TPGS.

In my experience, $3 are probably the MOST OVERGRADED Coin Type, $1 gold, and the Indian gold coins come next.

 

So if I have a coin with a few scattered hairlines, it’s grade is a total crapshoot?

 

No, if you have a coin with a few scattered hairlines, you go to the standard and match it to the grade which says "a few scattered hairlines are allowable."

What I'm saying is, my interpretation of what "a few scattered hairlines" are, and your interpretation, may be somewhat different.

 

Fun thread. I will probably never understand how to grade gold coins. To me, they seem to get cut a lot of slack with hairlines and hits. Maybe they should because of how soft gold is. I don't know, it's like a different world to me.

 

The fact that a single point difference can mean thousands of dollars in value means that changing standards are actually harmful to the hobby. But to keep people resubmitting, the standards loosen so that gradeflation becomes a thing (compare grades 30 years ago to ones today). Since PCGS does this, you automatically condone it, as evidenced by your ramblings above.

Definition of “standard:”

“an idea or thing used as a measure, norm, or model in comparative evaluations.”

So coins are graded by PCGS or NGC, and they are set to an instantaneous standard. In theory, this should be the standard to which all other coins are compared to. But as the standard changes, coins are graded to a new standard, while the other ones stay graded to the old standard. Which is correct? Which standard should I be comparing to. Now let’s factor in the yearly cycles of tightening/loosening standards. Which are right? Which are obsolete? Which should be compared to as the standard? If the answer is “all of them”, then there is no standard; it’s completely arbitrary. If the answer is “the newest one,” then the grades of everything else becomes obsolete.

 

TypeCoin971793, posted: "So if I have a coin with a few scattered hairlines, it’s grade is a total crapshoot?"

You know better than that!

BTW, that $3 is NOT "HAIRLINED." Those are tiny horizontal scratches. Hairlines are much more delicate.

 

They don't tell people that every coin automatically got a 2-3 grade upgrade because that would be a flat out lie as they didn't happen. Some coins have gone up, others have gone down, the majority haven't changed no matter how much you keep repeating that propaganda.

No that isn't it at all. The scale has been expanded + grades have been added, aspects of grading have evolved, it has nothing to do with loosening for more submissions. If you want to believe the conspiracy camp go right ahead, people in the know know otherwise. Moderns and world coins are their bread and butter, this idea that you people keep pushing that they have to survive off of trying to get the same classic coins over and over is just clueless. There is no shortage of Morgans or Saints for them to be grading anyway.

It's quite clear some of you really don't understand how little they make per coin especially on most of the classic tiers if you think they just keep loosening for classic submissions to survive.

My mistake for actually trying to help you again. I forgot you know everything there is to know about everything already. If you want to keep listening to the misinformation from people with no experience with TPGs and people that haven't collected or been involved in coins for over a decade that is your own loss.

 

You’re the one who openly supports ever-changing standards, regardless of their fallacy and negative impact on the hobby as it sits today.

 

I won't apologize for supporting the continuation of knowledge and human education

The only negative impact on the hobby is the people who think nothing should ever change, the ones propagating internet rumors with no actual experience, and the ones who grade things differently and get upset when they can't make money because the grade wasn't high enough

 

I've been telling Doug this for a decade, yet he continues his campaign of propaganda. The idea that the TPGs change their standards for numerical grading to drive resubmissions is total lunacy. Every time I bring up moderns and how much they account for TPG revenue, I am completely ignored. And when I explain that gradeflation is the natural result of the subjectivity of grading combined with a financial incentive to upgrade, coins that are high end for one grade will predictably end up as low end coins in the next grade up. The TPGs don't loosen their standards to drive resubmissions and you correctly labelled that assertion as an internet conspiracy theory.

 

Sometimes all you can do is say something and some people will never be convinced no matter how many facts are presented. I guess PCGS and NGC also funded their multiple international locations off of resubmissions from classic US coins .

The other thing too that we probably don't mention enough is that they don't even have to do anything to get many of the same classic coins as so many people crack them out or are told to ect anyway. Crossovers too.

It does get frustrating when people keep propagating these internet rumors and then new, or, young or inexperienced people keep falling for it