Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;physics-fan3.14, post: 4854466, member: 19165&quot;]I am strongly against grading a coin as &quot;Poor-1&quot; if there is no discernable date. If you can identify the date by using other markers (such as a unique die variety which is still discernable at that grade), then I&#039;m okay with it. </p><p><br /></p><p>I checked my copy of the ANA grading standards, and they actually didn&#039;t go below AG-3 (no mention of Fair 2 or Poor 1). My copy is quite old, however, and newer editions may have updated guidelines. Can someone check that? </p><p><br /></p><p>I did check the PCGS Official Guide to grading, and they listed &quot;Poor-1: Identifiable Date and Type.&quot; </p><p><br /></p><p>So to me - if there is no date, you can label as &quot;No Date, Morgan&quot;.... and that&#039;s about it. </p><p><br /></p><p>(And, because I know someone out there is going to bring it up - off centered coins with no date don&#039;t fall under this. Of course they have no date - but you can grade them based on their wear. Their lack of date isn&#039;t due to the wear, its due to the error. The Poor-1 standards apply to normally struck coins which have had their date worn off.)</p><p><br /></p><p>(And yes, this applies to Buffaloes and Standing Liberty quarters which still have plenty of detail left but have had their dates worn off due to bad design - they are ungradeable).[/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