The Sheldon scale gave us “precision grading” which was supposed to be more accurate. In some ways, it has, but like all grading systems and nomenclatures, the devil is in the consistency of application.
lol. VF and Choice VF solve that problem. There is a big difference between a 20 and a 30, and using “Choice” helps bridge gaps. Same thing with MS coins. UNC, Brilliant UNC, GEM UNC, Superb Gem UNC, etc. Claiming that this is getting rid of grading is ludicrous and shows your blind faith that the TPG system is the only way things can be. It would be less confusing and less subjective without the numbers. There would be fewer grades overall, which would help with consistency, and adjectives add the flexibility that numbers don’t. How many times has this board been split 50/50 on whether something is VF-35 or XF-40? There is often a huge price difference for scarcer coins. And resubmitting will result in the grade bouncing back and forth. Saying it is Borderline XF alleviates that problem.
The Sheldon sale was not intended to be a grading scale. It was a PRICING scale. Back in 1949, a minimal VF 1794 large cent sold for roughly 1/3 of what a brown UNC sold for. If an UNC of that variety, sold for about $60, a bottom-end VF sold for $20, one that was barely Good sold for $4, etc. A coin's grade is someone's subjective opinion of quality. It is not now and never has been quantitative. Does ANYONE on this list actually believe otherwise?
Exactly right! And I'll add that not all coins of the same "numerical grade" sell for the same price.
And all that is still how it was up through 1978 before the ANA Grading guide. I guess coins weren't graded before 1978.
Literally laugh out loud funny All I can do is again literally laugh out loud at how dumb this statement/comment is Please do tell us more about how the TPGs started the Sheldon scale, oh do share No it wouldn't, it would however be much easier for people to try and use their influence for higher prices especially on forum sales Who cares
Never, I hope. That would be one more way for the grading companies to render your collection "obsolete" and force you to spend barrels of money on grading fees and postage, to say nothing of running the risk of losing some of your prize coins in the mail. I don’t know why so many neophytes are obsessed with a 100 point grading system. It will add nothing to the accuracy of grading and only satisfy the grading companies’ voracious appetites for revenue and those who are infatuated with having all things on the decimal system.
Rick Snow was one of the most recent proponents of the 100 point scale, and I wouldn't exactly call him a neophyte! The 100 point scale just makes sense from a mathematical standpoint. It is a nice, even, round, easily divisible number. There's a reason the entire world uses the metric system, except for the United States. While we use feet and inches and cups and pounds, with their outdated relationships based on the size of the king's feet, the rest of the world has a sensible system based on 100s. Why do we keep the 70 point scale? Tradition, almost exclusively. How many posts in this thread have elaborated that the 70 point scale was broken from the day it was published? That's what we've always used, that's what we've been based on, and we have no plans to switch. Just like the US will never abandon feet and cups.
100 point scale isnt happening. People have been theorizing about it for YEARS. There's no reason to keep bringing it up Rick Snow tried to make his own system the market said no. We basically already have a 100 point system anyways and it changes nothing other than trying to turn everything on it's head. It's not happening
I agree that it probably will never happen. I also happen to be of the opinion that if a serious push with a reasonable 100 point system were to ever get a decent backing - I'd be on-board with that. That's my own personal opinion, of course.
I can certainly respect that, I wouldn't be for it myself as I don't see it adding any value. We don't even use the entire 70 point scale so I have a hard time thinking how expanding to a 100 would help anything especially when we are already fairly close with plus grades and most proposals have had 80-100 being MS grades. That 20 point MS scale we essentially already have, 60-70 is already 11 points and then + grades with 60-68 is another 8 so we already have a 19 point MS scale anyways. Edit to say that 60 probably never gets a + grade so we could bring the number down to 18 which is essentially what the 100 point scale would do
Are you prepared to spend the money to have your whole collection regraded, or at a minimum have it re-holdered? I respect Mr. Snow's grading abilities, but he as an insider in the industry, he probably has an angle to make a lot of money from this.
It would have to be regraded, since its a new grading scale And that's why I said it would have to be a serious push with momentum - not just some Rick Snow fairytale. If there were momentum behind the push, yes, I'd convert. I'd also update my book to a second edition to accomodate! Haha. I say all that... I still haven't sent my collections to CAC, and that has serious momentum (same with WINGS). Perhaps when the time comes to sell?
Literally no constructive argument to the contrary. Still no argument to the contrary. Show me where I stated that they started the Sheldon scale. My point is that its attempts at higher precision have made it rife with inconsistencies that can cause differences of thousands of dollars. Case in point: the crackout and resubmit game. Yeah, and dealers totally don’t try to oversell their “precisely” graded coins. Don’t forget that you suggested a clear conflict of interest: Again, I am amused by your inability to create a valid counterpoint.
Hey, it's all very simple, just expand the existing 70 point scale to include decimals and we can argue if a coin is MS60.1 or MS60.2 Alternatively, for a 100 point scale, math is your friend...an MS60 coin becomes an MS 60X70/100 = MS42NS (New Scale)
You literally said you want the numbers to go away and then offered a replacement of more letters. There's nothing to argue if you cant see how absurd that is
I’m also amused by your inability to count. There are currently 4 levels of VF: VF-20 VF-25 VF-30 VF-35 Using letters: VF Ch. VF Half as many levels, half as much confusion. That’s really all you need because there really isn’t that much difference between a 30 and 35 anyway. There is, however, a meaningful difference between 20 and 30. And if you want to add the third level that I implied (Borderline VF), which the current system does not allow for, then that is still more condensed than the current system. Please try again. This amusement is fun.