Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;physics-fan3.14, post: 2498217, member: 19165&quot;]There is nothing new about that idea. He might flesh it out with some details that are new, or he might have slightly different terminology, but Accugrade did the exact same thing 30 years ago. Many old-timers consider this a good idea (a single numerical grade could never convey all of the information necessary for a complete picture of the coin). As mentioned, NGC currently does something like this for ancients (a system that I greatly appreciate, even if I don&#039;t always agree 100%). EAC also does something seemingly similar (although their system is vastly more complex).</p><p><br /></p><p>The problem Accugrade has was that they weren&#039;t very.... accurate. If there was a company with experience, talent, and the marketing resources to convince enough people to accept it (and trust their grades), this system would be a good idea. The downside, of course, is the added complexity of grading (and valuing, and buying) would be very complex. It would take an entire book to explain the factors, and how they affect grade and value (while the current grading system already incorporates these factors, they aren&#039;t usually explicitly spelled out or ranked).</p><p><br /></p><p>Rick Snow is a leading numismatist, and widely respected. However, it will take a significant movement to gain widespread acceptance of this issue. Is the current grading system broken? Probably, yes. But it is what everyone is familiar with (and there is ~75 years of momentum behind it). Is a 100 point grading scale a good idea? As with the metric system, yes, it probably is - but you see how hard it is to implement even a common sense system of measurement that literally the entire rest of the world uses.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in