Distinguishing Between "Condition" and "Grade."

Here’s an example of a green holdered Shield Nickel that I’ve had in my collection for over 20 years. Look at the hits in the field and ask yourself if they were really that much more strict back then. I could digress and ask people to guess the grade but don’t want to hijack the thread so I’ll just put it out there now. It’s a straight graded MS63.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

baseball21, posted: "Says who a bunch of people that hate change and want to just defend their territory? The system that was decided on many decades ago is inherently flawed and still is. It's slowly getting worked into something that makes more sense and is more fluid but it obviously cannot happen over night."

Ok, now I get it. I guess I have had you confused with another more knowledgeable member all this time. Perhaps you can explain your opinion in the comments you posted.

1. The system that was decided on many decades ago is inherently flawed and still is. What part of the coin grading system used in the 1970's was flawed?

2. It's slowly getting worked into something that makes more sense and is more fluid. Fluid standards are not standards. Additionally, I cannot think of anything fluid below MS-60. What am I missing?

"Plenty of people feel the hard line was flawed and want to see it go away. It will most likely and hopefully continue to erode as time goes forward and with any luck one day we can have a real scale where coins are based on quality and things that lost a fight to a lawn mower won't ever be graded with a higher number than pristine coins just because that one has a touch of rub."

Plenty of people? Perhaps plenty of the greedy weasels who realized there were not enough MS coins to go around using the old strict standard that was in place before most of them were born. You see, the "hard line" made grading a coin MS much more precise. BTW, precision is one of the most important characteristics of an ideal grading system. We don't have it now and we never will. Precision (the ability to grade the same coin the same grade) can be faked when all graded coins are imaged or marked in some way.

"Changes had been happening to coin grading long before anyone on this planet was born. No living generation is an exception for changes either. If your generation really didn't want the changes it wouldn't have happened and the businesses of the TPGs would have failed. Plenty of TPGs have failed because the generations of active collectors at the time rejected their product. If the customer base kept saying I won't buy anything in xyzs holder dealers wouldn't send them anything.

The lack of ethics at the time without modern communication technology to expose or warn people certainly did give the TPGs a major boost for acceptance though. So yes even if you want to argue that only a couple people were responsible for that change the generation as a whole created an environment where people would accept that change."

Now that we can agree on. Generations of folks decided it would be better to send their AU coin (today's MS-62 in a large majority of cases) to a TPGS that would grade it MS rather to one that issued its actual condition. They would be STUPID not to play along!

 

I think what is interesting is that I did read the thread. My fault was that I read it from the 3rd pg. Then the first and second,But, couldn't bring any emphasis to the posters personality, and frankly a post without a second cup of coffee. I got the jist of the thread.
Those were some perty's from Buffnix.

 

I have a 1945 P dime that is REALLY close to FSB, which is the most lenient TPG I could send it to in order to get the FSB designation?

 

I don’t think that’s it. I think it was to please whiny dealers who wanted their “pristine” coin to get an inflated MS grade rather than a righteous AU grade so they could sell it for more.

 

Actually I remember ordering coins in the old days before TPG's and it was a bit of a "pig in a poke" situation. I think the TPG's were to alleviate some of that, so you could buy an unseen coin and still have a guarantee of what you would get. A bit short sighted I guess.

 

Likewise here is a OGH PCGS MS-63 FH I bought. I immediately sold it because of the damage on the obverse. However, this was an MS-65 quality coin that was net-graded due to the damage.

 

Mine was probably also netted down as it is otherwise very attractive.

 

You say damage? This is a beautiful Washie for an 83D. This is damage. Photo straight from a souvenir set.

 

Trust me. The two massive hits looked MUCH worse in-hand.

 

I have thought about it the best place for this 83D is face down in the coin cabinet. Among it's relatives.

 

What specific damage on the SLQ are you referring to?

 

Exactly, all of this has been going on for decades and plenty of early graded coins have downgraded or would down grade upon resubmission. The internet is the only place where you can just pull old holders and get upgrades.

One thing people should keep in mind is that when it comes to the old days were better posts and how things have gone down hill there are posters defending their careers and legacies at the time and the changes threaten that.

 

I may have had you confused with someone that was interested in a real conversation.

You quoted the major flaw in the system that I have posted many times including several times in this thread already.

Not fluid as in a moving target, fluid as in a real 1-70.

I've explained multiple times already including in this thread, but I will one last time.

According to the old scale and your "precise" system we don't have a 1-70 scale we have two different scales. We have 1-58+ (or 1-58 before plus grading) and 60-70. The 60-70 scale sits on top of the 1-58+ since they theoretically aren't supposed to interact or overlap in anyway. It's basically a factory sealed toy vs one that was opened even if just to look inside.

That is an inherently flawed scale when things are getting graded higher that are lower quality because of a hard line.

Getting rid of the hard line allows things to get graded where they should be. It's the only viable solution that has a real chance at the moment. The 1-100 scale could do it with a major overhaul of how numbers are viewed, but that kind of overhaul is dead in the water. The other logical solution would be to just literally have two scales of 1-58+ and then a separate MS scale of 1-58+ and make it really clear they have nothing to do with each other.

No actually plenty of people from all aspects of the hobby. Has nothing to do with not enough MS coins going around and everything to do with how silly it is to grade ugly unappealing coins higher than pristine coins based solely on slight friction or not.

The elimination of the hard line allows terrible MS coins not bad enough for a details grade to be moved to AU or lower as well, it works both ways.

We've never had a precision system including the old ones and the one you proposed. A truly precision system means that a coin could be looked at with no reference to the past and it grade the exact same every single time. That system does not exist. If a system has to use other means such as looking up a serial number that was marked on the coin or go through pictures to see if the coin was graded before to make sure it gets the same grade the system isn't precise, it's just relying on past notes taken on the coin.

Regardless of what you want to say MS coins would not have graded the exact same 100 percent of the time with your old proposed system or the old systems without cheat sheets. Pure technical grading has subjective aspect in it and anyone who thinks that they grade the same now as they did 50 years ago or 30 years ago is subject to personal bias and this includes people that couldn't care less about TPG grading and just stick to raw coins.

There is no system and never has been any system where every single coin will grade the exact same 100 percent of the time. Any system developed will always have borderline coins that can and will go either way and be correctly graded depending on the interpretation of something in the standard.

Any human that thinks they can have 100 percent "accuracy" in anything for their whole life vastly over estimates their skill

 

The breast and the right wall.

 

The SUBJECT of this thread is “Distinguishing between CONDITION and GRADE”. Many Learned Numismatists commenting on this thread have gone off on a tangent and into grading. Not giving their opinion on CONDITION and GRADE. As a non partisan, the US Mint has a Coin Term Glossary. Using a glossary from a coin grading service would be a conflict of interest. From the US Mint.

CONDITION: The PHYSICAL state of a coin. Let me add, NOTHING else.

Grade: Rating which indicates how much a coin has WORN from circulation. Let me add, NOTHING else.

Before 1949, the year I was born, there was no Dr. William Sheldon Grading scale 1 to 70. All subjective grading by dealers was by an adjective. At the time there was GEM, CHOICE and UNCIRCULTED. Now we have 11 divisions of UNCIRCULATED from MS60 to PERFECT MS70.

I buy a coin for my small collection by EYE APPEAL, not by what a TPG service says it is. They are just as inconsistent as I am. You and I have seen their inconsistencies. But my EYE tells me I like the coin for my collection. My EYE tells me if the coin has a CONDITION such as many bag marks, rim nick, hole, cleaned harshly, cleaned lightly, old cleaning, graffiti etc, etc..

I consider EVERY coin from 1 to 69 to have a DETAILS GRADE because it has a CONDITION. PHYSICALLY an MS 69 Details would have one minor ding, one minor something. Going down to MS 60, PHYSICALLY an MS 60 Details would have many dings, bag marks, scratches from other coins or other major somethings. Using the Sheldon scale you cannot have a perfect MS 70 with a condition issue. You can have an MS 69 graded as MS 69 Details Holed at 12 O'clock.

In only one interpretation can CONDITION also be considered a grade. In all other aspects of scratches, rim nicks, holes, etc., CONDITION is PHYSICAL damage. Buy the coin, not the holder. I holder for protection of a nice EYE APPEAL coin. I subjectively grade my coin before I send it for protection and know the condition of my coin before I send it for protection.

Now let's get back to the thread and your opinion of “Distinguishing between CONDITION and GRADE”.

 

TypeCoin971793, posted: "I don’t think that’s it. I think it was to please whiny dealers who wanted their “pristine” coin to get an inflated MS grade rather than a righteous AU grade so they could sell it for more."

You are correct but I didn't wish to post that. Major submitters forced the TPGS's to get loose. It is an economic thing. It took a year or two of back and forth and switching their business between the top two TPGS!"

Pickin and Grinin, posted: "This is damage. Photo straight from a souvenir set."

I've been told that the director of ANACS (in OH) kept a few damaged coins still in original Mint packages/sets to show to people who claimed the damage couldn't happen from the mint.

baseball21, posted: "One thing people should keep in mind is that when it comes to the old days were better posts and how things have gone down hill there are posters defending their careers and legacies at the time and the changes threaten that."

Please back up this broad-brush statement with NAMES & EXDAMPLES. Otherwise, this is just

baseball21, posted: "I may have had you confused with someone that was interested in a real conversation."

I have found that it is impossible to have a discussion with anyone who may be uninformed. It would be like an Earthling trying to communicate with a alien from Uranus!

baseball21 posted: "You quoted the major flaw in the system that I have posted many times including several times in this thread already."

This is a non-answer. I'm stupid and forgetful. What is the major flaw please?



baseball21 continued: "Not fluid as in a moving target, fluid as in a real 1-70.

I've explained multiple times already including in this thread, but I will one last time.

According to the old scale and your "precise" system (WRONG ALREADY!! The present system IS NOT PRECISE, I NEVER SAID IT WAS and that is the PROBLEM with coin grading today and for several previous decades!! The "Technical" Grading system I personally devised for the internal records of ANACS in DC and then use at the FIRST TPGS was precise. Clear enough?) that we don't have a 1-70 scale we have two different scales. We have 1-58+ (or 1-58 before plus grading) and 60-70. The 60-70 scale sits on top of the 1-58+ since they theoretically aren't supposed to interact or overlap in anyway. It's basically a factory sealed toy vs one that was opened even if just to look inside.

That is an inherently flawed scale when things are getting graded higher that are lower quality because of a hard line.

Getting rid of the hard line allows things to get graded where they should be. It's the only viable solution that has a real chance at the moment. The 1-100 scale could do it with a major overhaul of how numbers are viewed, but that kind of overhaul is dead in the water. The other logical solution would be to just literally have two scales of 1-58+ and then a separate MS scale of 1-58+ and make it really clear they have nothing to do with each other.

No actually plenty of people from all aspects of the hobby. Has nothing to do with not enough MS coins going around and everything to do with how silly it is to grade ugly unappealing coins higher than pristine coins based solely on slight friction or not.

The elimination of the hard line allows terrible MS coins not bad enough for a details grade to be moved to AU or lower as well, it works both ways.

We've never had a precision system including the old ones and the one you proposed. A truly precision system means that a coin could be looked at with no reference to the past and it grade the exact same every single time. That system does not exist. If a system has to use other means such as looking up a serial number that was marked on the coin or go through pictures to see if the coin was graded before to make sure it gets the same grade the system isn't precise, it's just relying on past notes taken on the coin.

Regardless of what you want to say MS coins would not have graded the exact same 100 percent of the time with your old proposed system or the old systems without cheat sheets. [ACTUALLY, since you weren't around, you are forgiven for this unfortunate misstatement. You see, there were only TWO GRADES OF UNC - Plus the AU/MS line to worry about. It was very easy to grade coins the same ANYTIME you saw it again. The Director named the system "archival" because it was constant over time and through changing market conditions!] Pure technical grading [Unfortunately you show you have absolutely no understanding of "Pure Technical Grading]has subjective aspect in it and anyone who thinks that they grade the same now as they did 50 years ago or 30 years ago is subject to personal bias and this includes people that couldn't care less about TPG grading and just stick to raw coins.

"There is no system and never has been any system where every single coin will grade the exact same 100 percent of the time. Any system developed will always have borderline coins that can and will go either way and be correctly graded depending on the interpretation of something in the standard."

Say, now that's pure genius. Who would have guessed that?

Any human that thinks they can have 100 percent "accuracy" in anything for their whole life vastly over estimates their skill."

Ditto, I don't know any one like that.

Thanks for your well thought out reply. I think if we were face to face we would find a lot to agree on. Unfortunately, IMO, continuing to post with you makes me look/feel like a fool.

 

One thing people should keep in mind is that when it comes to the old days were better posts and how things have gone down hill there are posters defending their careers and legacies at the time and the changes threaten that.

There is no system and never has been any system where every single coin will grade the exact same 100 percent of the time. Any system developed will always have borderline coins that can and will go either way and be correctly graded depending on the interpretation of something in the standard.

Any human that thinks they can have 100 percent "accuracy" in anything for their whole life vastly over estimates their skill

 

Bob Evancho, posted: "...thread is “Distinguishing between CONDITION and GRADE”. Many Learned Numismatists commenting on this thread have gone off on a tangent and into grading. Not giving their opinion on CONDITION and GRADE.

Already answered.

 

The flaws in this post have been pointed out. And we are waiting to learn who the posters are who this comment refers to: "...there are posters defending their careers and legacies at the time and the changes threaten that."