Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;CamaroDMD, post: 1943016, member: 5233&quot;]Doug, I am not trying to argue with you.&nbsp; You seem to always think I am...but I am not, in fact with the exception of about 2&nbsp; times in my 8 years here I never have.&nbsp; I&#039;m just trying to fully understand this topic.</p><p><br /></p><p>My experience has been that the TPGs tend to grade a coin based on the merits of it&#039;s date/MM (with some influence based on popularity...ex: the CC bump).&nbsp; I have always felt that ANA is somewhat the &quot;official&quot; authority on these kinds of things.&nbsp; The published ANA guide doesn&#039;t go into great detail on this subject...but the ANA guide also covers all coins and it doesn&#039;t have the space.&nbsp; Like you say...that is a topic for specialty books.</p><p><br /></p><p>However, since the ANA is viewed as the authority on this topic...they must have an opinion.&nbsp; Do they subscribe to the same age old &quot;practice of making allowances for known weakly struck issues, or being more strict with known especially well struck issues, that has been accepted by the numismatic community as a whole&quot; or do they have a different policy?</p><p><br /></p><p>One can&#039;t learn these things by looking at graded coins unless one buys into the views of the person grading them.&nbsp; Since you so often tend to disagree with the TPGs (who are the only authority actively grading coins) and site the ANA statutes as your evidence...I&#039;d like to know what the ANA view is on this topic.[/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