Attribution of PL and DMPL on raw coins

Maybe your standards have changed, Doug. I don't see a ton of difference from the early 2000's and now in terms of TPGs. They get it right MOST of the time--I'd say 95%+ When I don't agree with them, which is seldom, like you said, I don't buy the coin. My take on your grading is that you are extremely consistent, but harsh. Just one man's opinion--you seem to come in at least one grade below everybody else's opinion. That may be good, and it might not--no way for me to scientifically vindicate that. I mean no disrespect with this point of view--just that I consider myself an "average" grader for an experienced collector, and find myself agreeing with TPGs MOST of the time. Do they blow it? Of course. I think you probably have blown it during your years as a collector at one time or another--can't speak for you, and as I said, no disrespect intended. Just simply, nobody is infallible. That is why I like the numerical standard, and the third party, that has no vested interest in the process.

If anything, the TPGs have definitely GOTTEN TOUGHER on giving the PL and DMPL designations in recent years. That was the original premise of this debate (and I do consider it a valuable debate, conducted in a non-degogatory and professional manner). In previous years, 4-6" bought one a DMPL designation. Now, the 8" reflectivity that I spoke of (given ordinary sized type--12 point Century Schoolbook was the standard visible 8" away) has gotten much more difficult to attain.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

They're not any "better equipped" to grade and attribute than any knowledgeable collector/dealer, who has invested their time into learning about grading, attributing, and designating.

It's all based on knowledge. Nothing more.

 

I agree with, and have always understood, this. What I'm saying is that the TPGs are not any better equipped to grade, attribute, and designate coins than any knowledgeable collector/dealer.

The point Morgandude misses, is before a coin is submitted for grading and PL or DMPL designation, the submitter must think the coin possess PL or DMPL qualities. The only way that belief is substantiated, is by the person examining the coin, and determining, by the coin's appearance, that has those qualities for the designation.

A coin can be a PL or DMPL or any grade without a TPG's say so, and simply because the coin has not been slabbed, doesn't make the coin any less than it is.

A 64 is a 64 as long as the coin has all the appearances, and meets the criteria for a 64 grade, whether it's in a 2x2 or a slab.

 

I agree, and that further supports the position of several CT members who, on other threads, have stated that collectors, and dealers alike, have become lazy and unwilling to educate themselves on grading coins because they accept the TPG label as being accurate. They fail to take several factors into consideration, the most important one being that the TPGs as a hole, do not use a universal grading system, each one has set their own standards, and in some cases, those standards contradict what's been in place long before the TPGs came about.