Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;davidh, post: 405323, member: 15062&quot;]Interesting...</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m perhaps stuck in 1980 when I last collected.&nbsp; At that time (as I understood it at the time) grading was a matter of the visible detail compared with an &quot;ideal&quot; BU example of the same coin, now called MS-70 or PR-70.&nbsp; I may be wrong (again) but at that time, if a coin left the coin press with less than perfect detail then it could not approach a perfect grade.&nbsp; Also, the coin was graded to the weakest side, not like today&#039;s dual grade.</p><p><br /></p><p>Oh well...</p><p><br /></p><p>An ancillary question.&nbsp; In reality, does rarity play any part in grading?&nbsp; That is, say you have two absolutely identical IHCs with equal wear, color and detail.&nbsp; If you covered the dates then everyone would give them identical grades.&nbsp; However, if you uncovered the dates and one was an 1877 and the other was a 1909, would they then still grade identically?&nbsp; (in this, and any similar comparison, I&#039;m assuming that there are no other details on the coin that would indicate its date.)</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m thinking that, while grading it ideally objective, there&#039;s really a lot more subjectivity and bias involved than there should be.[/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