Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;RonSanderson, post: 3229067, member: 77413&quot;]Yes, I am pretty sure that is the only possibility.</p><p><br /></p><p>While I don’t need to go on a rant, this is a good example to point out how arbitrary these designations can be (no news there...).</p><p><br /></p><p>This cut looks sharp, and looks like a post-strike encounter with the edge of another nickel. If it had been a millimeter to the left the mark would be off the edge of the steps and it would be 5FS.</p><p><br /></p><p>Marks and other problems are already addressed in other parts of the grading standards. If the TPGs treated the designation as only a statement about the strike quality, and ignored later damage, it would be 5FS.</p><p><br /></p><p>Instead, the designation combines both the strike and post-strike events. A mark that would not affect the grade anywhere else on the coin takes on an exaggerated importance simply because of its random location. Conversely, weakness or excellent detail on the rest of the strike is ignored.</p><p><br /></p><p>If nothing else, it makes the FS designation even less useful for assessing the coin’s overall sharpness.[/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