Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;-jeffB, post: 3292782, member: 27832&quot;][USER=76863]@baseball21[/USER] has the right idea, but doesn&#039;t take it far enough.</p><p><br /></p><p>The numeric grading scale is a goofy idea, because it tries to map <i>several</i> different things into one number. These include strike quality, luster, bag marks (which somehow aren&#039;t &quot;damage&quot; or &quot;wear&quot; even though they happen after striking), circulation wear (which might not count if the coin is special enough), and maybe other things.</p><p><br /></p><p>It does <i>not</i> try to map &quot;damage&quot;, which is different from bag marks or wear. Never mind that an MS60 silver dollar or double eagle usually looks worse than a lot of parking-lot finds I&#039;ve come across, and never mind that the same scratch that would pass unremarked on a 1916-D dime will body-bag a 1916-P.</p><p><br /></p><p>And let&#039;s not even <i>start</i> on toning. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie11" alt=":rolleyes:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>The thing is, <i>different collectors weight these things differently</i>. So, we have &quot;buy the coin, not the slab&quot;, which makes perfect sense. But we also have &quot;don&#039;t buy key dates or expensive coins raw&quot;.</p><p><br /></p><p>The hobby as a whole is schizophrenic. But it&#039;s better than being dead, I guess.[/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