Enough arguing! A Different Look at Grading

OK, I've completely lost track of who is on whose side here and can no longer follow the arguments.

I am in favor of grading against an ideal standard. If a coin, for any reason doesn't meet that ideal then it should be downgraded.

If I understand correctly, others are for grading against the average that a particular mint put out for the year in question. Thus a weakly struck coin would grade well if most other similar (date and mint) coins were also weakly struck.

I'm not totally sure of the definitions but I assume that my beliefs represent Technical grading while the other's beliefs (as stated above) represent Market grading. Or is that a different subject altogether?

I laid out my thoughts on the subject in post #48 of this thread but got no comments, so I guess I'm in the minority, but I really don't understand what the big controversy here has been. Can someone boil it down for me?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

David, we are talking about grading against an ideal standard. There are no sides, just people who see things in different ways. You do understand correctly about grading against the average strike for the date and mintmark. That is the current system.

What I wanted to kick around is the idea of grading across the series, or at least master hub by master hub. We have been having discussions mostly around whether or not what we propose is possible, although that wasn't the intention. I saw your thoughts and I thought them to be an alternative to what I was discussing. It is interesting as an idea, but it is very dissimilar to what we were discussing.

I felt I would let someone else comment on it.

 

Speedy,

We don't have our eyes closed to the facts that the different mints used different standards during production. We know that and understand it. We simply are not willing to make allowances for that fact and instead think the mint that decided to use lesser standards be held accountable for their lack of production quality.

Under the current system of grading that makes allowances for date and mint, these two coins are graded the same.




Allowing strike to be evaluated across the entire series, this second coin would be grade limited at MS63 and could be market graded up to an MS64 given the excellent surfaces and eye appeal. Do you really think that collectors would have a problem seeing that coin in an MS64 Holder?

 

Paul what are the grades of those coins currently? I'd bet the second graded 65, right?

 

I would sincerely hate to have to explain the usefulness of the square root of -1 to these guys...

 

I would like to further illustrate my point using two coins that have vastly different strikes but the other elements of grading are essentially equal. I will revert back to Peace Dollars and the coin that started this discussion in my original thread. The first photo (courtesy of Anaconda) shows a well struck 1922 Peace Dollar graded MS67 by NGC. The surfaces, luster, and eye appeal are phenomenal. The strike is above average but not the best ever seen on a Peace Dollar. The second coin is the culprit (photos courtesy of Heritage). Again, phenomenal surfaces, blinding luster, and undeniably eye appealing, but the strike is one of the worst I have ever seen on a Peace Dollar, even for a 1924-P. This coin also grades MS67 by NGC. Now look at these two coins side by side and tell me with a straight face that they deserve the same grade simply because in 1924 the Philadelphia mint relaxed it standards and used lower striking pressure, larger die spacing, and overused dies.




I find it very hypocritical of the so called experts and leaders of the numismatic community to place so much emphasis on building a well matched set of coins across a series in similar grades and then make it virtually impossible to do so by using different grading standards for each year and mint with regards to strike.

You guys want facts, here is a fact. One of these coins does not deserve and MS67 grade. And before you say that it does because of the strike characteristics of the year and mint, take a look at this 1924 MS68 Peace Dollar.

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=388&Lot_No=2350

Now if the 1924 in the photo above had a strike like the one in the link above, I would have no problem with the assigned grade.

The prosecution rests your honor!

Paul

 

BTW, I started typing the post above because I knew what Doug was going to say about the Morgans before he said it. The Morgan post illustrates that both coins are MS66, but he is right, the other elements of grade are really not equal.

 

Doug,

The only factor that makes coin #2 not accurately graded is the strike. In terms of surface preservation, luster, and eye appeal, it is a 67 all day. Telling the rest of the forum that the second coin is overgraded and therefore my point is moot, is pure propaganda and an injudicious use of your respect factor simply to avoid even considering that you might actually be wrong.

The serial numbers are 3044375-009 for the Anaconda Coin and 1972975-001 for the weakly struck coin. Neither were graded since the inception of the CAC and the first coin is the more recently graded. Neither of these factors supports your theory even though I agree that the TPG's make slight adjustments to their grading standards over time.

As far as a fair comparison, you can't get more fair. Both coins have the qualities of an MS67 Peace Dollar with the exception of strike. And you are never going to get me to believe that the second coin getting an MS67 is a mistake. They saw the coin, saw the weak strike, and graded it MS67 deliberately in spite of the the strike problem. The TPG's routinely downgrade an otherwise premium gem to gem because of grade limiting marks. This coin leads me to believe that they don't have grade limiting strikes and are willing to overlook a weak strike if all of the other components for a premium gem are present.

 

Doug,

You are the best grader on this site by far. If anyone disagrees, feel free to chime in. My guess is that almost every member of the forum respects your opinion of grading a coin more than anyone else's, myself included. In fact, I would rank your grading skills equal to those of a professional grader given the fact that you are grading from photos.

I know the TPG's make mistakes and overgrade coins, don't dispute it one little bit. However, I do believe that they ignore strike more than any other element of grading. I have seen them do it on Morgan Dollars, Peace Dollars, SLQ's, Buffalo Nickels, and certainly on Jefferson Nickels. If I have seen examples from every series I collect with inferior strikes residing in MS67 holders, it leads me to believe that under certain circumstances, they ignore strike as an element of grading.

I very rarely see a coin with booming luster, full strike, and great eye appeal with a grade limiting mark make it into an MS67 holder. I like the grading system we have, but these types of things make me wonder how important strike actually is to the TPG's when they grade a coin. Some collectors feel strike is everything. From what I have seen, strike seems to be the least important in their eyes.

Do the graders have reference material regarding strike characteristics for each year & mint for every series? They can't possibly have all of that information memorized.

 

now we are talking i propose we should extend it to the dies. its a crazy idea but it will be more consisitent for reasons explained earlier

 

Doug is a great grader no doubt about it. There are times he makes mistakes just like anyone else and as far as comparing him to professional graders that is unjustified. IMHO he is far far better than most at NGC and PCGS but here too its a leap of faith we all like to think we are the best. The discussion should not be about a persons reputation or their ability to grade. Lehigh is no mug with the bat either. Even the so called pro grders disagree so we should focus on 2 things in my opinion where we want to be ( ideal situation) and how we will get there

The graders do have all the refrence material in the world. do they refer to it every time i dont know. can they attribute all coins even with the help no they cant

 

and here I thought that I was the best grader in the world...

 

Worth reading as it relates to this thread. This is the type of information I was hoping to see here - not the it cannot be done and you are wasting your time discussion we seem to be stuck in. Even if it cannot be done this type of information is informative and helpful. Anyone know more details about the pcgs system?

http://www.coingrading.com/compgrade.html

 

Btw: select the link on strike on the site listed above. His reference to the Mogan strike values by date and mint is something I really wish I had for all of the different US coins...