Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 3298721, member: 112&quot;]Regarding the issue of standards changing, yes, throughout history standards for many things have changed. As a matter of fact I doubt there is more than a small handful of people on this forum who have any idea at all of just how much and how often standards for almost everything have changed. I am and always have been well aware of that. Take weights and measures for example. Most take them for granted and I think assume they have remained fairly constant. That however is anything but true. And if anybody wants to read about it they can do so here - </p><p><a href="http://www.fjcollazo.com/documents/WtsMeas2.htm" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.fjcollazo.com/documents/WtsMeas2.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.fjcollazo.com/documents/WtsMeas2.htm</a></p><p><br /></p><p>But as far back as you can go in the historical record there is one thing that ALL Standards for anything, everything, have always had in common - they are published, established, written down, and everyone is made aware of them. And this is done because otherwise there would be no standard.</p><p><br /></p><p>And that is what brings us to the TPGs and coin grading standards. Nobody here will argue that each TPG there is has their own unique grading standards. That fact alone proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that in reality there are no grading standards for a standard is something that everybody follows, not just some. Instead of a standard what we have is mixed hodgepodge of definitions for the very same things. </p><p><br /></p><p>And it goes even further than that. For many years I have said that I would gladly accept any set of grading standards, if only someone would define them, write them down, establish them, publish them - so that that everybody knows what they are and can follow them. But not one of the TPGs does this, not one. Yes, in the past, PCGS has written and published what they called their grading standards. And I say &quot;so called&quot; because in every single case, for every grade they list in their books, there are nothing but grossly, and I believe quite intentionally, vague descriptions of each grade. And in most cases, even those vague descriptions do nothing more than cover a wide range of grades - as opposed to a definition or listed criteria for each individual grade. And to make matters worse, PCGS does not even follow their own vague descriptions and in fact grossly over-grade based on their own published books !</p><p><br /></p><p>So, that alone proves beyond any shadow of doubt, and again by definition, that not one TPG has an an actual set of grading standards - not one of them !</p><p><br /></p><p>A lot of the discussion in this thread has been an effort of trying to define what an uncirculated coin, or an MS coin, actually is. To do that one pretty much has to know the history of coin grading. I do not think there are many here who do, though there are quite a few who &quot;think&quot; they do. The actual history is that around the turn of the 20th century meaningful discussion began, stress began, of what grading standards should actually be. It was not until 1958 when Brown and Dunn published their book, A Guide To The Grading Of United States Coins, that the very 1st set of grading standards was actually established. </p><p><br /></p><p>Since then grading standards changed many times, this is beyond dispute, and I do not believe anybody does dispute it. Grading standards were constantly evolving, being added to, more well defined. One of our forum members even helped in doing that. And eventually, in 1986 the ANA settled on a set of grading standards, and the founders of the TPGs even helped do that - they helped write, define, those standards. And in &#039;87 the book listing all those standards for every grade was published. And it&#039;s no coincidence that the 2 most widely accepted TPGs were founded in &#039;86 and &#039;87. </p><p><br /></p><p>For about a year those 2 TPGs, NGC and PCGS followed those standards established and published by the ANA. But then they decided the standards were too strict and they needed to loosen them up some. They admitted this publicly. That was the last time they ever publicly admitted such a thing ! But they followed their new sets of grading standards until 2004. In that year they began grossly loosening their grading standards - but they didn&#039;t tell anybody they did it. And when they were accused of doing it they flat out denied it ! </p><p><br /></p><p>Since then, ALL of the TPGs have been repeatedly loosening their grading standards , not just once but several times. Today they even grossly over-grade what they were already over-grading in 2004 ! </p><p><br /></p><p>But to this day, nobody, not one single person knows what any of the TPGs&#039; grading standards actually are. Why not ? Because the TPGs do not, will not, tell us what they are. And by default that means that not a one of them has any grading standards. For a standard is something that must be declared, written down, published, so that everybody knows what it is. Otherwise there is no standard at all - none.</p><p><br /></p><p>And that is what we have today - no grading standards ! </p><p><br /></p><p>So, those who think standards change, evolve over time, and should do so - fine, works for me ! <b>But you at least have to tell us what they are !</b> But there is not anybody here, or anywhere else for that matter, who can do that.[/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