Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1348819, member: 26302&quot;]I guess they changed them. Doesn&#039;t surprise me. They used to say a 63 was an above average coin and the majority of coins submitted would not grade 63. Any others remember this definition from the late 80&#039;s/early 1990&#039;s? 65 used to be a superlative coin, a grade many dates would not have a specimen of, and anything above 65 was worthy of a news report.</p><p><br /></p><p>Boy how times have changed. Doesn&#039;t surprise you, though, when the graders are the same ones who define the grade. Take the OP coin. What guarantee is there its NOT a 63? None, since the TPG can simply say that we think its a 63, we set the rules of grades, so therefor whatever is on the slab is correct. This is why grading a coin while NOT using ANA standards but letting the grading companies define their own grades basically is meaningless. If the TPG said they will grade according to a third party, (ANA) standards, then the grades would have more validity in my eyes.</p><p><br /></p><p>Chris[/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