Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Jaelus, post: 7853187, member: 46237"]Yes I'm glad you brought that up, because I should have clarified on this point. When I say damage here I'm not talking about problem coins. I am talking about damage that does not detail a coin, and this absolutely includes wear. Let's be real here, rubbing a coin down to basal state through wear is 100% a type of damage. It's just "acceptable" damage. The grading scale from 1-58 measures the amount of damage that has been done to a coin through wear. I absolutely do see it as an obsession with wear, since so many call out wear as being special above other types of damage when it's really not. A coin just has an overall appearance. Eye appeal, strike, amount of detail remaining (whether removed by wear or other means), amount of luster, originality, etc. Now don't get me wrong, understanding wear is an important part of understanding a coin's state. I just think we can do a lot better with a grading scale created from scratch for the sole purpose of assigning relative market value. Regarding your comment that the grading system is well defined and works for most of us. Yes likely most people are okay with it because it's what's being used already. I would say the TPG grading standards as they are actually being applied are not well defined, and that quite a lot of people take issue with that.[/QUOTE]