Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 2096117, member: 19463&quot;]When applying a word grade to ancient coins is it appropriate to consider factors other than wear?&nbsp; Slabbers might assign a higher word but down grade the coin in terms of their strike or surface ratings.&nbsp; Some of us might drop a coin a grade or two as recognition that it has problems while others might prefer to use the higher word and describe the faults with a few words (or a paragraph).</p><p><br /></p><p>Take for example the coin the postman delivered today.&nbsp; The seller called it VF which suggests that they downgraded the unworn coin (at least EF) due to the unmentioned gashes (about ten of them if you look closely).&nbsp; I have no complaints about the coin because the faults were quite clear in the seller&#039;s excellent photo.&nbsp; I suspect that the only reason I won the coin was that other more picky collectors were driven off by the gashes even though they were not mentioned.&nbsp; How would you describe this coin?</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Very Fine (the dealer&#039;s answer)</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Extremely Fine but with several surface faults</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; EF 5/5 strike 3/5 surface</p><p><img src="http://www.pbase.com/dougsmit/image/159320985.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /> </p><p>Someone will point out that there are only two grades: &#039;I want it&#039; and &#039;No, thanks!.&nbsp; I did not have a Rome mint hut and this is a good looking coin even with the ten gashes.&nbsp; I suppose these are the ancient equivalents of bag marks on silver dollars so I should have offered the grade option of MS60.[/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