Precision grading

And they don’t even follow that!

I am much more of a technical grader (as you know), so I place much more emphasis on surface preservation and treat eye appeal as a checkmark. At grades above 64, the eye appeal should be net positive. If not, then that is grade limiting to the lower level.


Elements of “Technical-ish” Grading (weights):

Surface Preservation--60%
Luster------------------30%
Strike------------------10%
Eye Appeal------------Yes/No

Using your example: Morgan Dollar with phenomenal vibrant lustrous bag toning, above average strike, and near unimprovable eye appeal with MS63 surfaces.

SP: 63 x 0.6 = 37.8
L: 67 x 0.3 = 20.1
S: 65 x 0.1 = 6.5
EA: Yes

Resultant Grade: 64.4

So it makes 64. I would consider it a “luster bump” because I place an emphasis on luster in grading.

Putting it in a 65 holder runs the risk of an ignoramus paying 66 money for it as a premium 65 rather than a superbly premium 63/64. That is why I am against the practice. Because the TPGs don’t talk about what they do, it’s nearly impossible for most collectors to learn what they do. That encourages confusion and misunderstanding, but the TPGs don’t care about the “little guys” as long as the TPGs maintain their control of the market.

My other qualm is that trying to force the market to accept that “Our grade of XX means the coin has to be worth $XXX” is a fool’s errand. Again, this is not publicized for obvious reasons and feeds beck into the above problem. However, they have succeeded in getting most collectors to believe “Grade XX = Value $XXX” by keeping them from having to learn how to grade. That is the only reason why the exact same coin can have two vastly different values just because the holder changed. The TPG opinions are not treated as opinions, but as God-sent, end-all be-all fact.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

As was originally said, it is all subjective. We sometimes get too carried away with grading points to these things we do. If I like a coin, I will pay what ever I will for it. Someone else might like it more and want to pay more. OK, he got it. I am not in this game for the profit aspect of it. Its because I love coins and want to preserve and protect and cherish them. After I drop dead, someone else can figure out what to do with all this treasure I have accumulated.

 

If they were transparent about by proposed system, collectors would already know that the coin was market graded 2 grades above its surface preservation level. The current system of valuing toned coins is based upon a grading system with “zero” transparency. Once the new system is in place, I’m confident that collectors would adjust their method for valuing toned coins and allow the resultant grade to drive the price.

As for your different weighting system, it really doesn’t matter what the weights are, as long as they are published and followed. Furthermore, if they would place the individual element grades on the label, it would help people buy coins sight unseen. I consider luster to be king, even more important than surface preservation at the gem+ grades, but it is brutally difficult to judge via photographs. Seeing that L67 or L68 on the label would assist me in placing stronger online bids from places like Heritage, EBay, etc.

 

VF is the modern OK grade for ancients that was originally graded as fine. OK/VF will do fine!-For most of us. Off flan/flan flaws are more important issues...who wants a Caesar coin with a Elephant but no Caesar....It's the elephant side that counts and the name for most.

 

So here's a question: given that different TPGs apparently have different standards, which TPG standard grading scale is being used in the various price guides? If one magazine lists a grade for a particular coin, would that reflect the PCGS grade or the NGS grade? What is the basis for those grading scales?

 

Here are the "official" Sheldon standards as published in his book.

Precise enough for you?

 

When you all say "strike"...you mean relative to the die quality used, not in absolute terms ? If a particular die for a particular year or mint never produced really sharp strikes, would you grade on a curve or no ?

 

In the 19th century, there were no defined grading terms. Dealers and auctioneers used words to describe their coins, if they said anything at all about them. In those days, “Fine” often meant nicely struck, as in a “fine impression.” Sometimes, however, it meant very nice, as in a “Fine Proof,” a term that would make no sense at all in today’s market. Other terms that wouldn’t make sense today include the truly oxymoronic “Almost Proof.” History and connoisseurship were more important to the collectors than condition. Fortunately, there were more coins available than collectors who wanted them, and the price spread between worn and unworn pieces was small.

Grading has always been controversial. Increased popularity of coin collecting in the early part of the 20th century, led to a desire to solve the grading problem. In March, 1913, H.O. Granberg, a member of the Committee on Classification for the ANA, proposed adoption of a uniform standard for classifying the condition of coins. His description of Fine, “very slight traces of wear only in the parts of highest relief,” describes what we call Extremely Fine today. Good meant “everything distinct but somewhat worn,” whatever that meant. (F-VF, maybe?) What he called Fair, “much worn but all outlines showing,” would be Good today. Anything worse than Fair was called Poor. Gradually, these and other grading terms based on the amount of wear came into common usage

 

I too have written a lot on this topic. I'll join in when I have time.

Until then two thoughts...

1. True technical grading as was first developed and used was done using florescent light with a stereo microscope set at around 7X. The standard back then was very strict as the system was based on Sheldon's descriptions for the grades. Nothing on a coin could hide including HAIRLINES and any marks hidden in the relief design (which are not as important as the obvious marks).

Precision can only be accomplished when the same coin is graded the same way any time it is seen over the years as long as its condition remained unchanged. The stricter a system (no wiggle room) and the more you can see aids in attaining this precision. Back then Numismatics and the Technical Grading System practiced at the second authentication company and the first grading service had a standard. No trace of wear = MS. The rest followed Sheldon.

2. Since precise grading that never changes can now be done very easily: Assign a grade, image the coin, and record its grade for posterity we are closer than you think to a great system. Grade the coin and let the market value it. The major TPGS's will need to find another way to make money as graduation, crack outs, etc will be ineffective.

Anyway, as soon as coin dealers became involved in grading it all went to hell. You CANNOT combine value, rarity, ownership, green beans, economic conditions, eye-appeal, magnification, strike, differences in size and composition, the popularity of a coin series, etc into any system and expect it to work. That's as stupid as trying to figure out what a NET-Graded Large cent looks like if you cannot see it!

 

Insider, not only what you said, but the TIME spent on each coin using technical grading and the equipment goes up a ton. The business model of the TPGs is drastically altered if they no longer use naked eyes and 15-20 seconds per coin...but equipment and 1 minute or more.

 

Anybody remember Compugrade? How'd that work out?

 

I take a coin out of the flip and from about 12 inches away using a 100W incandescent light I get a gut reaction that is usually OK. I can tell if the coin is original, authentic and its grade. Next, it goes under my scope (7X is usually plenty of magnification) to confirm my initial assessment and look for problems. Then I'll often follow with a 7X hand lens and incandescent light to see its "real world grade."

10 seconds is longer than you would think. It probably takes about twenty to take it out, put it back and type in the grade. Some coins take longer.

 

That was 30 years ago.... I'd like to think technology has evolved just a bit since then!

 

What is the difference between "you're gonna give them an MS63 or MS64 based on bagmarks", or describing a virtually Gem coin as "AU details, improperly cleaned", or "scratched"?

 

I disagree.

The only reason he developed his numerical grading was his already well-developed obsession with pseudoscientific quantitation of things that were at most semi-quantitative, especially his weird and racist concepts about body form into mathematical formulae, just like he did for coin grading/pricing.

 

I am pretty sure that there is still no computer around today can grade eye appeal.

 

Having been an accountant for over 30 years, I believe that anything can have a quantitative grading scale, as long as there is an absolute value for anything. When grades are given that are more qualitative than quantitative, you are basing your opinion on how well you like the items. Is 3 scratches OK, or can you have five scratches before you get a "Details" grade. I had a 1904 Liberty Double Eagle.. my first coin to have graded. It came back with "UNC DETAILS: Scratches on Obverse". I call the TPG and asked where the scratches were and how many. The answer I got back from them was, "We don't keep that kind of information. We examine the coin, makes some notes, and based on experience, we record our opinion." Is that right? Do they keep any records?

 

Watching lots of stuff on TV during our quarantine (as if I don't watch lots at other times) I see many scientific and pseudo-scientific tales whereby laser scans are generated to map things to a gnat's whisker. There would be little reason (considering I have no idea of what I am talking about) that couldn't be done for coins. A model would be generated of a "perfect" coin and candidates could be compared to that to give a % conformity. Of course this totally neglects what the coin looks like.

 

Those aren't identical coins and yes they almost certainly should end up with different grades

 

I'll take your word for it, and I am not an expert even on the coins I collect, but it seems to me that even 20 seconds is too short to look for luster, strike, overall eye appeal....check for counterfeit status....look to make sure it's not been cleaned/altered/dipped....and look for small "tells" in certain parts of the devices that tell you overall quality and wear items.