Who is in favour of the 7 Point grading system?

< The 7 point grading system would SIMPLIFY things but would probably put the grading services out of business. >

And thiis would be a problem? In return for their services the grading firms have suced over half a billion dollars out of the coin market in the past twenty years for a bunch of plastic and just as must arguing and disagreement over grading as there was before they started.

< Numbers are quantitative! >

Only if they represent actual repeatable measurements. If it dosn't result from a measurement it is just a label the same as an adjective.

< Dr. Sheldon put numbers to grading almost 30 years before grading services entered the numismatic community. Numbers work! >

Sheldons numbers represented value ratios between grades on a grading scale that already existed. They did not describe the grading of the coins in any way, and just a few years after he stated them they no longer applied and became meaningless. Numbers did not work.

< Also the Sheldon scale first came out in 1949. Let's see...PCGS didn't slab there first coin till 1986. NGC followed a year later. Nope, can't agree that the Sheldon Scale was attributed to those nasty "slabbers". They just used a scale that made sense because grades were quantified instead of a subjective desciptive terms like: slightest, faint, sharp, etc. >

But the "Sheldon grading scale" was developed by the ANA in 1977 and they were at the time doing coin certification and followed with grading using the "Sheldon scale" the following year. And actually the scale was not "quantified" nor did the numbers have any relationship to the actual condition of the coins. The ANA could have used any group of numbers for the various grades. Sheldons numbers were chosen simply because they had been used before and were familiar to a fair sized group of numismatists. (The early copper people and other numismatic scholars who were familiar with the history of the collectors of early copper.)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree with Conder.

 

Take the EF grade from the OP. If you had two of these "EF" coins, say a 1934-S peace dollar, but one was clearly better than the other, you would price them differently. If you can determine a difference in quality, why not allow for it in the grading scheme?

In this example, one is a couple of hundred dollar coin. The other nears $1,000.00. Explain to me how they can both be "EF" coins.

 

I'm not a fan of the current system because it tells nothing of a coin's condition and is only useful for determining its value. I also am not a fan of the numbers since they really have no meaning. Unc, BU, near choice, choice, near gem, gem, choice gem, suberb gem, and choice superb gem work better for me, but if we had a descriptive grading system these would be mostly unnecessary except to give an overall grade.

Of course all these grades are not necessary in all areas of numismatics. Some things are not usually collected by grade so a seven point grading system would be fine for them. Indeed with something like good-fors all you need is poor, fine, excellent, and new.

Trying to incorporate a seven point system in Morgan dollars or clad quarters wouls simply result in collectors picking off all the finest BU's at regular prices and leaving the dregs completely unsaleable. It really was the demand for top quality pieces at all levels which drove the market to differentiate so many levels of uncirculated. So long as people desire only the finest or only the finest they can afford then this differentiation will persist in some form.

 

[Clapping...loud ovation as I type]

Ditto pcrdnadave!!

 

That looks more GVF to me.

 

GVF? Well I have a coin here that I will grade:

GEMBUPLPLUS

That is a Gem Brilliant Uncirculated Proof-Like Plus. You may grade it Gem Brilliant Uncirculated Satin or Semi Proof Like Plus, but I am sticking with my first grade.

Reminds me from a scene from Robin Williams in "Good Morning Vietnam" when he said to his C.O.:

"Seein' as how the VP is such a VIP, shouldn't we keep the VC on the QT cause if it leaks to the VC, he could end up an MIA and then we'd all be put on KP."

 

Easy. Take away the plastic.

But seriously, it's hard for me to relate to foreign grading (such as used overseas), but an $800 difference in those two coins? Who are we kidding? Or more importantly, who are we fooling?

 

I'm still using my method, cos i'm awkward, whichever method is the oldest and the most backward of the two is the one i'll stick to and martyr myself to.

Betamax is still better than VHS.

 

I love buying coins from folks in the British Commonwealth! They're always so much nicer than I expect!

 

I'm a more conservative grader. Although Peace Dollars are not a series i'm familiar with, never really liked them to be honest.

 

The 34-S Peace dollar is notorious for being weakly struck (it would be easy to undergrade this issue if you didn't know). Also, since no Peace dollars were struck in the years 1929 to 1933, almost all 34-S Peace dollars went into circulation (they were more widely used in the west). Because of this, they jump dramatically in price as the grade increases.

Peace dollars have always been my favorite, especially the 1921. I never did really like coins with two ugly, double chinned, big nosed fellas wearing wigs. I'm joking, really. I do like Irish coins, does that count?

 

Why not just keep the current system (since no one is going to abandon it anyway) but explain how the final grade was arrived at--how much weight was given to srike, luster, surfaces etc. Then the "market" would be a real market where buyers decide if they see the same things in the same strenghts. If they agree they'll pay if the don't they'll walk. That's how real markets are suppose to work.

It's probably true that coin collectors can't grade the same way as the grading companies do. Why should they? How are they expected to learn anything from a net grade that tells them nothing as to how and why a grader came to that grade. Yet we've been told almost from day one that to learn market grading we should buy lots O' slabs and study them carefully. What are we studying, the Enigma machine? If you have no feed back as to what you see in strike, luster, surfaces ect. on a coin compared to what the grader says is there, where is the learning process? Where is the learning process in anything that has no feed back loop?

I don't believe the problem is with numerical grading itself. It's just a short hand for discriptive grading. If grading is to be more advanced than pointing and grunting, discriptions, whether in long hand or short hand are necessary. The problem, IMO, is that a net grade with no break down as to how it was arrived is an un-decipherable discription better suited for cartels than free markets.

 

I didn't vote because this poll isn't going to have any effect on anything. Those who favor using the Sheldon numbers (the Sheldon "scale" is a mis-nomer) will continue being happy that the U.S. TPGs do so; those who favor the 7-point, or its cousins the 10-point, 14-point, etc., will continue doing so for their own subjective analyses; and I will continue judging world coins by my own standard - do I like their appearance well enought to pay the seller's price?

(If I go first, the Beautiful Bride will be well enough taken care of that the sale value of my collection won't be material, and otherwise the kids/grandkids will have to be satisfied with whatever I can't take with me.)

 

Probably market grading caught on largely because collectors like to have a convenient way to price their coins. If a coin is graded 65/64/66/66/63 how do you find a price for it? My guess is that eventually the market will simply work out multipliers for each grade and the market will decide which attributes are the most important. More importantly though is that individuals will be able to know about what a coin looks like by its grade and value it accordingly. Pricing coins would be quite difficult for beginners but they will quickly learn grading.

 

See you gotta know the series. Actually it's Morgan Dollars that i always liked, only reason i never was keen on Peace Dollars is cos they replaced Morgans... and i don't tend to like coins that replace my fave designs cos it's that coin's fault for being invented. So long live the Morgan.

Irish coins could count. Actually with the referal to the wigs, one of them is actually female (believe it or not), but everyone thinks it two fellas. And no neither of them very particularly attractive by all accounts. But the coin has crowned shields and crowned shields are my thing.

 

Hey Sylvester,

You and Kyra should get along fine. The two of you can start the "I Love Morgans" club. (VBG)

catman

 

Although the 7-point system simplifies grading, I think it makes it more difficult to accurately describe a coin's condition. The number system, if used correctly, can more accurately pinpoint a grade. This is especially important on sight-unseen purchases. Also, I have seen too many coins that exceed the criteria for a VF grade but cannot quite reach the EF status. What happens with these in a 7-point grading system? With the numbered system, it's considered a VF30 or VF35. I like having the in-between grades to work with.

 

You're a 10

It does not really matter what system we use as long as we agree on it.
Even with a 70 point system we have disagreements.

We would disagree on coins if we had a 5 or 500 point system- because we are all human and see things differently.

However Susanlynn9 is a "10" and I dare any of you to disagree with me on that grading- - -
Richard