Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Grading Standards
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="GDJMSP, post: 2190650, member: 112"]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 - </p><p><br /></p><p><i>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).</i></p><p><i><br /></i></p><p><i><u>That has changed. Today the leading commercial grading services routinely certify</u> 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.</i></p><p><br /></p><p>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 <b>how the TPGs had recently</b> <b>changed their grading standards.</b> Keeping in mind that this book, the 6th edition, was published in 2005.</p><p><br /></p><p>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.</p><p><br /></p><p><i>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. </i></p><p><br /></p><p>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.</p><p><br /></p><p>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.</p><p><br /></p><p>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.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="GDJMSP, post: 2190650, member: 112"]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 - [I]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). [U]That has changed. Today the leading commercial grading services routinely certify[/U] 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.[/I] 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 [B]how the TPGs had recently[/B] [B]changed their grading standards.[/B] 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. [I]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. [/I] 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.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Grading Standards
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...