Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;baseball21, post: 2885515, member: 76863&quot;]I think it&#039;s fine if someone wants to grade to their own different standard as long as they realize how their standard differs. </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve never directly compared their book to their YouTube grading series, but if the YouTube series differs I would see that as a more modern amendment to the standards.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m okay with that.&nbsp; As [USER=71723]@V. Kurt Bellman[/USER] has said in past threads grading standards can and do evolve.&nbsp; In all honesty given who one of the most prolific &quot;researches&quot; was before that time frame, I see the adjustments that have been made over the last decade more as returning back to facts and weeding out all the made up information that had infiltrated numismatics for a while.&nbsp; We certainly know more and have a much better factual basis of knowledge than we did when those standards were published.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>One example of that would be <a href="https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/988832/whos-ever-seen-a-matte-proof-standing-liberty-heres-one-in-an-anacs-holder" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/988832/whos-ever-seen-a-matte-proof-standing-liberty-heres-one-in-an-anacs-holder" rel="nofollow">https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/988832/whos-ever-seen-a-matte-proof-standing-liberty-heres-one-in-an-anacs-holder</a>[/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