Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;physics-fan3.14, post: 910274, member: 19165&quot;]I guess what I use to grade my coins is a hybrid of market and technical grading then: I absolutely evaluate marks, but I consider the luster and strike to be technical aspects of a coin. They were influenced by how well the coin was made, and how well it was preserved and treated. I absolutely incorporate them into my grade, along with eye appeal. An eye appealing coin should grade higher - there is no doubt in my mind about it. </p><p><br /></p><p>Where I differ, however, is I apply the same standards to all coins, no matter the rarity. It irks me to see a VG 1916D in an F holder, just because its rare. It doesn&#039;t matter! </p><p><br /></p><p>How do you feel about having different standards for different issues in a series which were made differently? For example, I will grade a 52D Franklin completely differently than a 53S Franklin - because I know that they were made to very different standards. I suppose this is your point about market grading, although I really do think it is valid. You just won&#039;t ever find a 53S with a solid strike, so if you are grading based on strike, you will never have a 65 coin. In this case, I agree with market grading.[/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