Distinguishing Between "Condition" and "Grade."

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

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Any human that thinks they can have 100 percent "accuracy" in anything for their whole life vastly is an ignorant, foolish idiot.

I wonder who the posters on Coin Talk are who are defending their careers and legacies?

 

So, if I may, can I ask again if Condition and Grade are the same thing or do they have different meanings?

 

Conversations seem pretty well defined if people want a real conversation and not personal attacks

 

I completely agree with the above. Having two grading scales is silly.

A lot of people get hung up on wear. Why? Wear is damage just like anything else. Who cares if the damage is from a bag mark or a tiny bit of rub? Both are conditions that affect the surfaces. The relevant measure of a coin's grade is eye appeal. End of story.

Ignore the condition description for a moment and just look at the number. It just doesn't make any sense that a 70 with a microdot of rub suddenly drops down to a 58, while a 70 that gets banged around for a month gets a 62.

 

JCro57, asked: "So, if I may, can I ask again if Condition and Grade are the same thing or do they have different meanings?"

I appears that the answer to your question depends on who you ask.

Jaelus, posted: "...Having two grading scales is silly."

It sure is! And anyone who says there are actually TWO GRADING SCALES in the commercial coin market is...ah, never mind. OTHERWISE, you may be about the often heard opinion that there is a different grading system for certain coins and certain people.

"A lot of people get hung up on wear. Why? [Do you think that perhaps it is because the ORIGINAL definition for MS or UNC plus the modern definition of MS on the PCGS website uses the word: W E A R?" ] Wear is damage just like anything else. Who cares if the damage is from a bag mark or a tiny bit of rub? Both are conditions that affect the surfaces. The relevant measure of a coin's [COMMERCIAL] grade is eye appeal. End of story. [...and the continuation of the flawed FICTION perpetrated on us by the coin dealers . Perhaps you would take the time to explain to all the less knowledgeable folks here the difference between a contact mark and friction on a surface.]

Ignore the condition description for a moment and just look at the number. It just doesn't make any sense that a 70 with a microdot of rub suddenly drops down to a 58, while a 70 that gets banged around for a month gets a 62."

In the present system, 50% of what you stated DOES NOT OCCUR. What does occur is a large number of MS coins with obvious evidence of PMD are STILL GRADED 70! That's the eye-appeal system you and others adore. That's the system where pretty AU's are commonly graded MS. Something to think about for the "fanboys:" You better pray that things don't ever change and your AU's drop back to AU! A similar thing has already been happening to slabs. Coins with a green bean are worth more than those w/o.

 

How true.

 

Anyone who says there are two scales is absolutely, unquestionably correct. When an MS coin gets rub it drops off of the 60-70 scale and enters the 1-58 scale at the top, regardless of where it was on the 60-70 scale. That's the very definition of a two-scale system.

That's the people getting hung up on wear my friend. A terribly outdated way to think about coins. You've got a beautiful coin and you're squinting at it looking all over for a tiny hint of rub so you can put it down on the circulated scale instead of the MS scale. Utter nonsense. The TPGs have been moving in the direction of common sense for a while and they should continue to do so.

Honestly, AU58 is a terrible grade that shouldn't even exist. AU55 is fine - wear visible to the unaided eye. Great. I get it. More power to you. If there is wear on the coin that must be scrutinized with a loupe to detect, it's not there. MS coin.

 

Excellent question

 

Wear is not damage any more than age is disease.

 

Only in numismatics do you have the bizzare notion that rubbing something until it wears away is somehow not damaging to the object.

But of course it is.

• Wear rubs off some of the surface of the coin.
• Rubbing off some of the surface of the coin damages the coin.
• Damaging the coin is damage.

I'm honestly not sure how one would even go about trying to refute those facts.

 

By making your definitions.

 

Not damage in the sense of a details coin, but it is deteriorating for a grade in an illogical system.

@Jaelus is making very good logical points.

 

Would still love to hear your thoughts on this situation.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1006334/why-is-icg-in-the-second-tier-with-anacs/p3

 

Yes, of course. I'm not talking about wear detailing a coin. Details due to damage is for abnormal non wear-and-tear damage. Any collectible market will rightly distinguish between normal wear-and-tear and abnormal damage.

As I said above:

I'm talking about problem-free coins here. By damage I mean anything that negatively affects the condition of the coin and contributes to lowering the grade.

To clarify, what I'm saying in my above posts is that wear is not special compared to other types of normal wear-and-tear. There is no difference between a significant hit and high point rub. Both are conditions that damage the coin and affect eye appeal. One should not bump the coin down to a 58 with the other only resulting in a minor point deduction.

 

Jaelus, posted: "Anyone who says there are two scales is absolutely, unquestionably correct. When an MS coin gets rub it drops off of the 60-70 scale and enters the 1-58 scale at the top, regardless of where it was on the 60-70 scale. That's the very definition of a two-scale system."

P L E A S E - WHO is putting this nonsense out! There is one commercial grading system. ONE. ONLY ONE. Look at the ANA grading Guide. Look at ANY GRADING GUIDE EVER PUBLISHED (except the EAC "net" folly). If I carry this crap further there are actually TEN different grading scales - figure how I arrived at that stupid opinion.

"That's the people getting hung up on wear my friend. [Ditto, You are a respected foil my friend] A terribly outdated way to think about coins. You've got a beautiful coin and you're squinting at it looking all over for a tiny hint of rub so you can put it down on the circulated scale instead of the MS scale. Utter nonsense. The TPGs have been moving in the direction of common sense for a while and they should continue to do so."

Here is MY "End of Story"... Anyone is free to buy all the AU coins they wish that have been examined by many of the top professional graders in the country and placed in slabs with MS labels. That's the way commercial grading has evolved. Low MS#'s = AU. It has been that way for decades! Hopefully in the future, the computers will also be programed to ignore what they can easily detect!

I cannot change commercial grading but I may change some opinions. Thus, my only reason for posting is to make sure folks know what is going on so they can make a more informed decision when buying a coin. Example: I needed an MS-62 $20 for my teaching set. The major dealer let me look through a batch of 20+ PCGS graded Saints in 62 slabs. I found two "true" MS coins (no trace of wear) and picked the better one with more eye appeal. I could have purchased any coin in the group FOR THE SAME PRICE.

"Honestly, AU58 is a terrible grade that shouldn't even exist. AU55 is fine - wear visible to the unaided eye. Great. I get it. More power to you. If there is wear on the coin that must be scrutinized with a loupe to detect, it's not there. MS coin."

I disagree, AU-58 is a wonderful grade. Unfortunately a top of the range 58 (wonderful, mark free surfaces) is bumped to MS for eye appeal while a beat up 58 with the same amount of rub is downgraded. As to this: "...must be scrutinized with a loupe to detect..." only tells me that you either have very bad eyesight or YOU HAVE BEEN EXAMINING COINS WITH THE WRONG TYPE OF LIGHT! Ever wonder why florescent light is not recommended for grading? I changed a dealer's opinion of this light in less than two minutes when he showed me the "gem" he just bought at a show. The next day he added an Ott light to his table!

 

Completely agree. Any system that lets a coin get graded higher with multiple huge marks just because it has no friction over a pristine coin with slight rub is broken and needs to be fixed. As you mentioned thankfully that is happening even though some dislike it

 

Here is an image of a coin with an MS-64 obverse and an MS-66 reverse. Unfortunately it has some insignificant rub (W E A R) that virtually disappears under a 100W incandescent light. Guess that makes it an MS-62! Go for it! LOL.

 

I’ll just leave this here....