Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 1075455, member: 15309&quot;]You are confusing what Farazzi was saying.&nbsp; He was talking solely about the practice of market grading coins with wear to mint state grades.&nbsp; This is a change from the old grading standards that pre-dated the TPG&#039;s.&nbsp; Doug claims that the TPG&#039;s always included that aspect of market grading in their standards but have abused it in recent years.&nbsp; Either way, I am willing to admit that the TPG&#039;s have changed their standards regarding the market grading of coins with roll friction, toning, and key date rarity.&nbsp; The number of coins affected by those changes is very small in relation to the total number of coins graded.&nbsp; What I don&#039;t agree with is the notion that the TPG&#039;s intentionally change their standards for the numerical grade thereby causing gradeflation.</p><p><br /></p><p>If you admit that you can sometimes see breaks in luster in photos, then there is no excuse why you can&#039;t find a coin that shows evidence of wear (from circulation) in a mint state TPG holder on Heritage.&nbsp; Both you and Doug claim that it is a common practice.&nbsp; All I have asked for is one example.&nbsp; I don&#039;t think that is an unreasonable request.&nbsp; And I have not belittled you at all.&nbsp; And yes, I have bought hundreds of uncirculated coins from photos because I agree with the accepted practice that the TPG&#039;s employ regarding roll friction.&nbsp; Remember the Saint I posted.&nbsp; I saw the wear in the photo, I saw the MS63 grade on the slab, and I accept the fact that the wear on the leg and breast are the result of roll friction, not circulation wear.[/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