Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 1597442, member: 112&quot;]Mike, I don&#039;t expect perfection out of the TPGs, never have. What I do expect is a certain level of consistency, and a maintaining of their grading standards. The latter of course has a lot more to do with we&#039;ve seen over the years than the former. You, and just about everybody else on this forum, knows my thoughts on the matter of grading standards. So I&#039;ll not bother repeating them.</p><p><br /></p><p>For as long as I have been posting on various coin forums, (and since long before that but none of you would have any of knowing that of course), I have maintained the same level of consistency when it comes to grading. So I see no reason, except one, why the professionals could not have done the same.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now me personally, show me a coin, in hand and I&#039;ll grade it. Next week, next year, 5 years later, I&#039;ll grade that coin the same the vast majority of the time. I have no problem admitting I&#039;m not perfect either. But my level of consistency is far higher than of the TPGs.</p><p><br /></p><p>And ya know what else ? I also have no problem admitting that many, if not most, of the professional graders are better at grading coins than I am. But there is one major difference between us. Care to guess what that difference is ?</p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t have a company telling me what standards to use.</p><p><br /></p><p>The problem is not with the graders Mike. The problem is with the companies. How can the graders possibly maintain any semblance of consistency when they are not allowed to just grade the coin ? I readily agree that there is a certain level of subjectivity when it comes to grading coins. But that level of subjectivity is greatly magnified when a grader is told that he has to follow a given set of standards dictated by the company he works for. You see, that is the variable that changes everything.</p><p><br /></p><p>If left alone, to just grade the coins, the level of consistency in coins graded by the TPGs would return to what it was in years gone by. And most of the variances due to subjectivity would be removed.</p><p><br /></p><p>We&#039;ll see what this coin comes back as. But this thread is a good example of what I am talking about. Look at the percentages in the poll. 67% graded that coin as 64 or higher because that is what they have become used to out of the TPGs in recent years. </p><p><br /></p><p>And to use your words, &quot;I never disappoint&quot;, I graded it exactly as I would have always graded it. Exactly as I would grade any coin - because my standards don&#039;t change. If I see wear on the coin, and the coin is not known to have a specific pedigree that proves it was never in circulation, then I grade that coin as AU. And yes, I can tell the difference between weak strike and wear. And I don&#039;t accept excuses that roll friction or album friction, etc etc are acceptable on coins graded as high as MS67. If a coin has wear then it has wear, and if it has wear then it is AU. Period, end of story.</p><p><br /></p><p>I guess what I&#039;m saying Mike is if I can do it, be consistent, (and I&#039;m not a professional), then they should dang sure be able to do it.</p><p><br /></p><p>Blaming it on subjectivity, that is just another excuse.[/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