Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Jaelus, post: 7852920, member: 46237&quot;]But you don&#039;t actually believe that. You know as well as I do that the TPGs will readily grade circulated coins up to MS62 and sometimes higher (an example of which is the entire point of this thread). You also know I&#039;m sure that in early US coins where they are more forgiving of minor problems they will net grade technically uncirculated coins as low as AU55, even though AU55 requires unaided detection of visible wear. There are other specific examples of this, such as how high point wear is frequently disregarded altogether on Saints, etc.</p><p><br /></p><p>Ok so you know despite the TPGs not publishing their standards that this has, in fact, changed, and that grading has moved away from valuing a hard line between circulated and uncirculated. My point is that where grading has moved to is this bastardization between technical grading and wear-agnostic quality grading. It doesn&#039;t really make people in either camp happy (evidenced again by the example given by the op in this thread).</p><p><br /></p><p>I just want to see it continue on to the logical evolution where grade prefixes can be dropped altogether, and issues can simply be noted on the slab like they do with banknotes.[/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