Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Morgandude11, post: 1508714, member: 37839&quot;]Maybe your standards have changed, Doug.&nbsp; I don&#039;t see a ton of difference from the early 2000&#039;s and now in terms of TPGs.&nbsp; They get it right MOST of the time--I&#039;d say 95%+&nbsp; When I don&#039;t agree with them, which is seldom, like you said, I don&#039;t buy the coin.&nbsp; My take on your grading is that you are extremely consistent, but harsh.&nbsp; Just one man&#039;s opinion--you seem to come in at least one grade below everybody else&#039;s opinion.&nbsp; That may be good, and it might not--no way for me to scientifically vindicate that.&nbsp; I mean no disrespect with this point of view--just that I consider myself an &quot;average&quot; grader for an experienced collector, and find myself agreeing with TPGs MOST of the time.&nbsp; Do they blow it?&nbsp; Of course.&nbsp; I think you probably have blown it during your years as a collector at one time or another--can&#039;t speak for you, and as I said, no disrespect intended.&nbsp; Just simply, nobody is infallible.&nbsp; That is why I like the numerical standard, and the third party, that has no vested interest in the process.</p><p><br /></p><p>If anything, the TPGs&nbsp; have definitely GOTTEN TOUGHER on giving the PL and DMPL designations in recent years.&nbsp; That was the original premise of this debate (and I do consider it a valuable debate, conducted in a non-degogatory and professional manner).&nbsp; In previous years, 4-6&quot; bought one a DMPL designation.&nbsp; Now, the 8&quot; reflectivity that I spoke of (given ordinary sized type--12 point Century Schoolbook was the standard visible 8&quot; away) has gotten much more difficult to attain.[/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