What is the Philosophy of Grading Series (Seemingly) Differently?

Welcome to the world of TPG Grading

Grading this coin one way and another coin a different way is not just limited to world coins or coins from any particular country. Many US coins are graded completely differently than other US coins, even when they are both from the same time period. And there is never any rhyme or reason to it ! They do it that way because that's the way they want to do it. In other words, they do not follow any standards. They just do what they wanna do.

 

I feel I should point one thing out that is similar in a way but yet different from the question asked in this thread.

There are a few examples of specific coins of given date/mint combinations that are graded differently, using different standards, than the other coins of the same series. For example, the early S mint Morgans are graded more stringently using tougher standards than are applied to other Morgans. This is because basically the entire mintage of those few dates/mint are exemplary. And the opposite is also true with some, and I stress some, of the O mint Morgans for their entire mintage is known for being poor examples so they are graded less stringently, more leniently than other Morgans. This same kind of thing applies to a few specific date/mint coins from other series and denominations.

Some folks don't understand this reasoning, others think it is an invention of the TPGs, but it isn't. This principle is one of the oldest that we have in coin grading and it was established and accepted industry wide long before the TPGs were even thought of, let alone created.

As for the why of it, it's pretty simple. It's because typically in any type, any series, any denomination, coins from any and all date/mint combinations are found to be all over the map when it comes to typical condition for MS examples. What I mean by that is that there will be a few to quite a few coins that were struck very well with very good surfaces, many with average strike and surfaces, and a few to very few with below average strike and surfaces, and some with downright poor strike and surfaces. Typically this is a function of how long a given set of dies was used to strike those coins. In other words when the dies are new and fresh they produce very nice coins, but as they wear the quality of the coins produced decreases steadily.

And that is why when you find a given date/mint combination and all or almost all of them are exemplary, or poor - the rules for grading those specific coins change and become either more strict or more lenient.

But as I said in the beginning that has nothing to do with the primary question asked in this thread. But it is worthy of note.

 

No, your hypothetical doesn't work. Ya see, even circulated coins can be determined to have been very well struck, to have been of extra high quality when they were initially struck. That's why I said there were very few examples where the exceptions are made. The only time the exceptions are made is when basically the entire mintage of a given date/mint is known to have been struck either poorly or very, very well. Exceptions are not made for coins with a low condition census whether those still existing examples are high grade or low grade.

Some folks get confused over what you're describing. The special designations, and this goes for all of them not just the PL designation, have nothing to do with the actual grade assigned to the coin. In other words the designation does not make the grade go up or down. A coin can be graded MS60 and still get the PL designation, or any other special designation. Or it can be graded MS69 or even MS70 and not get the designation. The grade the designations have nothing to do with each other and are not dependent upon each other in any way.

No matter how bad the condition of the dies, or how weakly the coin is struck, no coin can ever be anything but MS the moment after it is struck. So yes, the concept of what you're talking about could happen.

But AU50 would be a bad comparison point. I say that because a coin that is AU50 is still going to have very good details, it will only be graded AU50 because of the amount of wear on the coin - not for a lack of detail.

But a very weakly stuck coin could easily have very bad details, with some of them even lacking detail at all, and yet it would still be graded MS. It might be a very low MS grade, even a 60, but it would still be MS.

Ya see, you're trying to compare the amount of detail on a coin in order to determine if it is MS or not. But the amount of detail doesn't have anything to do with whether the coin is MS or not. The only thing that determines that a coin is not MS is wear - not the amount of detail the coin has.

 

There is no way of knowing for certain how much wear the previous coin may have had or not had. But it is a reasonable assumption that it had at least some wear, and maybe a lot.

Yes that is correct.

Planchet quality is and should always be a factor of consideration, one of the grading criteria in other words, when grading any coin. To put it another way it's kind of like the old saying - you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. With coins, if the planchet is of poor or very poor quality you would be truly hard pressed to make a high quality coin out of it. I won't say it's impossible but is extremely unlikely !

Your implied question of - is that coin you pictured one of the exceptions when it comes to grading ? To be honest I don't know if it is or not. But I would say that given the situation in which it was made - it could be. I mean you have to consider that here we are at the World's Fair and somebody has a press set up in the Canadian Court - and they are striking coins, using whatever they can for planchets. So it stands to reason that high quality coins are simply not going to be produced. They are minting tokens, momentoes if you will and their only interest is in plopping them out for somebody to buy for that reason. Given that, yeah, leniency in grading should be given - in my opinion anyway.

But is that coin an AU50 - not by any definition in my opinion ! There's leniency and then there's being ridiculous - and that grade is ridiculous. And no it doesn't matter a whit what was used as a planchet !

 

LOL !

 

I'd bet a LOT they didn't ! Especially since none of the others were.

http://www.socalleddollar.com/WorldColPicts.html