Enough arguing! A Different Look at Grading

well lets try it one more time

so you and i agree that a 2008 P and a 2008 D are 2 different coins?

next

but we have not looked into how a 2008 P coin itself can be different if the dies are worn out and get replaced

we acknowledge this in issues like the 1922 no D and the 1955 doubling where we see a visible difference but not otherwise.

my proposal is we are making a mistake even 2 coins of hte same year and mintmark cannot be subjected to the same standards if they are made using different dies for the purposes of consistency now this is not very common in the usa

but i am studying some coins here where there are 3 bangles on the hand and if the dies are worn the 3 bangles come close together and become a bracelet thus fundamentally altering the design now how should those coin be graded

and what are your thoughts on that?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

some would say that EVERY evalutaion system is biased or else everything would be equal. I guess it depends on which bias you want to discount and which one you want to value

 

you're missing the whole concept of a composite...

think of the best Morgan you can think of. What does it grade? Does it have flaws? I bet it does. If so, then grade this theoretical coin by it's flaws and you tell me the grade of the best Morgan you have ever seen.

 

Doug, do we have to go into the definition of what the word "is" means? By definition, in order to compare anything against anything else, you have to have a preference for one thing over another, that's what a bias is.

 

you have to value certain attributes is what I mean to say. Bias is a word that actually means slanted unfairly, and I don't mean it that way

 

then the answer to your question is MS-69

 

I'm not judging against any coin, I am judging against an ideal.

and no... we are looking at a coin as a product. something that was manufactured to a standard. You are looking at it as an artifact of a mint for a specific date and year. This is a difference that you will have to abandon in order to see what Paul and I are trying to discuss.

 

I am tired, and I will talk more of this in the morning. At this rate, I am going to be at 2000 posts by next week. lol goodnight all

 

Who says they don't exist. They do and one is in auction right now.

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1121&Lot_No=4956

 

well then shouldnt the same be applied across years then? what is the difference? all i am saying is there is no consistency. what is the difference otherwise between 2007 and 2008 P cents

 

But that is where I lose you. You see, coins aren't manufactured like any other product. Different mints had/have different standards, so you can't judge an S mint coin like you do an O.
The S mint (lets keep on the Morgan track here) provides a very strong strike, whereas the O mint provdies a weaker strike.

Now I know that this is nothing new to you, but what I can't get is why you decide to close your eyes to these facts...??

Speedy

 

I don't think he's ignoring this fact, Speedy. But to be realistic, the NO mint did indeed strike just as good of coins as any mint to begin with. The problems with weakening strikes arose when they didn't have new dies to use because of the unfortunate business of being such a remote minting facility, and dies were used until their quality was far gone. To a degree, the same thing happend with S minted coins at the time. That isn't a natural phenomenon...that was poor planning and judgement on the Mints part. So why shouldn't they be held accountable for their standards?
Guy~

 

Really? The one one the previous page on my computer says 1980 not 1981.

 

Speedy, we don't ignore those facts. We just want to evaluate them all against each other, not just one date and M/M at a time.