Grading Standards

That wasn't my point, if you're addressing me. My point was that strict grading will come back into style. That's not the same as rolling the clock back 20 years!

p.s. I do admit I subscribe to the "never hurt me none". That's why I laugh when my doctor asks me if I wear a freaking bike helmet, LOL.

 

Oh I'm well aware it says that John. But ya see here's the thing, the 3rd edition of the ANA grading standards was written in 1986 and published in 1987. And if you compare the actual grading criteria for all grades for each and every coin in the 3rd edition to the actual grading criteria for each and every coin for all grades in the 6th edition that was published in 2005, you will find 2, and only 2, individual grading criteria in 2 specific grades and only those specific grades, that were changed. And those 2 changes are for Buffalo nickels in F12 and Lincoln cents in F12.

Those changes are :
Lincoln cents obv
1987 - Liberty shows clearly with no letters missing.
2005 - Liberty shows with no letters missing.
Buffalo nickels rev
1987 - Horn and tail are smooth but 3/4 visible.
2005 - Horn and tail are smooth but partially visible. Rim is complete but flat in spots.

Those minor changes, for just those 2 grades for just those 2 coins, are the only changes. Every other grade criteria listed, for every other coin in the entire book is exactly the same, word for word, in the 2005 6th edition as it was in the 1987 3rd edition.

Now if you want to call that changing their grading standards, then OK, they've changed them. But I sure wouldn't.

 

Not exactly John. You see the text you quoted above from the 6th edition, there's a couple of short paragraphs directly above that text that kind of clarify things. Those paragraphs state -

Under current grading standards, coins which exhibit significant weakness of strike cannot be graded MS65 (or PF65) or higher. To qualify as MS65 a coin must have a fairly sharp strike (but not necessarily a completely full strike).

That has changed. Today the leading commercial grading services routinely certify Buffalo nickels as MS66, or superb gem, even if the horn, shoulder, and head fur details are weak or missing. Similarly, a Standing Liberty quarter can be graded MS66 even though the head might not be fully detailed and some of the rivets in the shield might be missing.

Then comes the text that you quoted above. What I find to be the truly pertinent text is the line I have underlined above. In other words, what the ANA book is doing is describing and reporting how the TPGs had recently changed their grading standards. Keeping in mind that this book, the 6th edition, was published in 2005.

Now that said, and going as far back as the 3rd edition ANA book published in 1987 this is how the ANA themselves dealt with weak strike on MS65 coins on page 17.

If an uncirculated coin exhibits weakness due to strike or die wear, or unusual (for the variety) die wear, this must be adjectivally mentioned in addition to the grade. Examples are MS60 - weakly struck, or MS65 uncirculated - lightly struck.

The point I am illustrating is that ANA standards, even in 1987, as well as all subsequent years, allowed and permitted weakly struck coins to be graded as MS65. In that regard there was no change in ANA standards.

And if you further check throughout the entire books, the 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th editions of the ANA standards, the written descriptions for MS65 (in fact for all grades other than the 2 I noted previously) are exactly the same, word for word, both in the beginning sections of the book and in the grading criteria for every individual coin listed in the books. In other words, the ANA did not change.

What did change was the TPG standards, and the 6th edition ANA book was making a point of stating the TPGs had changed in the text you quoted, and that I added.