Coin Grading Standards Lowered?

Ok folks, I have a ANA grading standards book I bought 45 yrs ago. Recently I was looking at 1983P quarters on E-bay and noticed coins graded by both PCGS and NGC as MS66 and MS67. Now next to NONE of these coins were anything close to these grades according to my ANA book. Most were in the AU50 range and a few were close to VF30. Now my question is,.... When did ANA standards become lower? Or is this in compliance with how the younger generation feels about fairness for everyone? Because if this is true I have a handful of MS66 1983P quarters.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Your question is pretty vague without photos. It sounds like you are saying that PCGS & NGC 1983-P quarters are overgraded by ANA standards. Both PCGS & NGC use their own proprietary standards and not the ANA standards, but if you were to post photos of the coins that you think are overgraded, we could give you our opinions of the assigned grade. We could also give you our grading opinion of your 83-P quarters if you wish.

 

see above

 

Walt Knoch, posted: "Ok folks, I have a ANA grading standards book I bought 45 yrs ago. Recently I was looking at 1983P quarters on E-bay and noticed coins graded by both PCGS and NGC as MS66 and MS67. Now next to NONE of these coins were anything close to these grades according to my ANA book. Most were in the AU50 range and a few were close to VF30."

Walt, While the grading standards have become less strict in the period you mention, to say that NGC and PCGS MS-66 and 67 graded coins look AU-50 and lower indicates that you have not learned to grade coins yet. Either accept that as a fact or you can disagree and prove my point to everyone here!

I'm going to suggest that you put that grading guide away and purchase the new ANA guide. Your book is obsolete (except for the introduction). Next, join the ANA and order the coin grading course and the video. Then go to a coin show and look at the actual coins with your new grading guide. You will see that what I have posted is true. Good Luck!

 

I can't show the magnified pictures, otherwise you really can't see the imperfections on these coins. But in a nutshell,. the fields aren't clean. the eagles breast has worn feathers and there's wear on Washingtons hair. My book says this is in the AU50 range. Look closely at most of these quarters on E-bay. I know what my coins are, what I didn't realize is PCGS made up their own standards which seem to be well below ANA standards which states.... MS65 - No trace of wear, a few barely noticeable nicks or marks may be present. Perhaps you can enlighten me as to what the PCGS standard states?

 

I'm curious! Why do you always quote someone by typing it out (or Copy/Paste)rather than clicking on "Reply"?

Chris

 

Can you link the listing on E-Bay so we can see the seller's photos?

 

I'm "different."

This better?

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1983-P-Wash...403005&hash=item2382ba463b:g:C-kAAOSwJ4hY97Ra

 

I think you are reading too much into this. The seller simply doesn't care to post better photos and even makes a remark about it in his listing. The coin is probably graded correctly but you are just seeing an awful photograph that is hiding luster and emphasizing flaws, including those on the holder.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1983-P-WASH...403005&hash=item48a061660b:g:kKgAAOSwLWBZf3jZ

Theres more too.

 

This guy is using scans which are usually even worse that bad photos.

Listen, you are making a judgement about the grading standards of PCGS & NGC based off some of the worst images I've seen on E-Bay. While I have disagreed with the TPGs on occasion, I have never seen them grade a modern VF coin MS66. Until you provide a link with photos good enough to even provide a grade, I'm going to have say that I trust the graders at the TPGs.

 

So the pictures fail to show the breast feathers then you think?

 

Walt, many modern clad quarters do not have the details that vintage, silver quarters did. BTW there is enough in the image of the second NGC quarter you linked on Ebay for me to agree with the MS-66 grade.

 

Scans are notorious for not showing proper detail. Something I use when trolling Ebay pics.

 

As 'insider' said, the modern copper-nickel hubs and dies are less detailed than '64 and earlier pieces. The mints knew that the new alloys would not strike as well and adjusted accordingly. The newer grading guides have been revised with this information.

 

I believe all coins should be graded equally regardless of age, rarity, etc.
But this is not the case. Key dates and very old coins get a little leniency.
Also, some dates are notorious for weak strikes or poor dies. Like the 1983 quarters.
And in this case, examples that are graded higher for this year would not receive those same grades for different years. One reason is comparing to the examples that have been sent in for grading, and the other is the notorious weak strikes for this year. All things being equal, if all coins were graded equally, these coins would be graded lower.

 

Exactly, there are basically 2 things to consider:
1) scans don't show all the details
2)a weakly struck coin may look like AU, especially on pictures

 

I know from personal experience how hard it is to capture breast feathers with a camera, so yes, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that these photos & scans simply aren't showing the details of the coin. For example:



And I'm pretty good at numismatic photography.