Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Precision grading
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Lehigh96, post: 4503235, member: 15309"]I have given my input on this topic many times in the past. I think technical grading ignores so many attributes of a coin that it can never again be used effectively as a grading system. To do so would trade the complaints we currently have with complaints that hideously ugly coins with clean surfaces grade higher than coins with lesser surfaces, but are clearly superior in overall quality.</p><p><br /></p><p>That brings us to the "standards" of the market grading system being employed. The reason why people "claim" that standards aren't being adhered to is because all they see is the final result of the grading process. If the TPGs used more transparency, and provided the foundations for their grades, they would go along way to explaining some of the more egregious market graded examples. This can be done easily by providing a breakdown of the elements of grading an assigning values and weights for each element.</p><p><br /></p><p>Elements of Grading (weights):</p><p><br /></p><p>Surface Preservation--40%</p><p>Luster------------------20%</p><p>Strike------------------20%</p><p>Eye Appeal------------20%</p><p><br /></p><p>Then consider a market graded Morgan Dollar with phenomenal vibrant lustrous bag toning, above average strike, and near unimprovable eye appeal with MS63 surfaces. The result would look like this.</p><p><br /></p><p>SP: 63 x 0.4 = 25.2</p><p>L: 67 x 0.2 = 13.4</p><p>S: 65 x 0.2 = 13</p><p>EA: 69 x 0.2 = 13.8</p><p><br /></p><p>Resultant Grade: 65.4</p><p><br /></p><p>So you have a coin with MS63 surfaces that grades a solid MS65. And why shouldn't it? I have seen many bag toned Morgan Dollars with premium gem luster and ultra gem eye appeal. They are far superior to the blast white widgets that make up the rest of the Morgan Dollar population. And it would be easy enough for the TPG to provide this info on the reverse label (SP63-L67-S65-EA69).</p><p><br /></p><p>Furthermore, the weights don't have to remain static; the TPGs could change the way they weight each element of grading based on the series of coin that they are grading. For example, I submit that classic commemoratives which rarely if ever have very many surface marks should not have surface preservation taking up 40% of the grading process. Strike, luster, and eye appeal are much more important in grading commemorative coins.</p><p><br /></p><p>The end result would be a set of standards that were still subjective, but were applied in a logical and consistent way and accompanied by transparency that would reassure the TPG customer base.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Lehigh96, post: 4503235, member: 15309"]I have given my input on this topic many times in the past. I think technical grading ignores so many attributes of a coin that it can never again be used effectively as a grading system. To do so would trade the complaints we currently have with complaints that hideously ugly coins with clean surfaces grade higher than coins with lesser surfaces, but are clearly superior in overall quality. That brings us to the "standards" of the market grading system being employed. The reason why people "claim" that standards aren't being adhered to is because all they see is the final result of the grading process. If the TPGs used more transparency, and provided the foundations for their grades, they would go along way to explaining some of the more egregious market graded examples. This can be done easily by providing a breakdown of the elements of grading an assigning values and weights for each element. Elements of Grading (weights): Surface Preservation--40% Luster------------------20% Strike------------------20% Eye Appeal------------20% Then consider a market graded Morgan Dollar with phenomenal vibrant lustrous bag toning, above average strike, and near unimprovable eye appeal with MS63 surfaces. The result would look like this. SP: 63 x 0.4 = 25.2 L: 67 x 0.2 = 13.4 S: 65 x 0.2 = 13 EA: 69 x 0.2 = 13.8 Resultant Grade: 65.4 So you have a coin with MS63 surfaces that grades a solid MS65. And why shouldn't it? I have seen many bag toned Morgan Dollars with premium gem luster and ultra gem eye appeal. They are far superior to the blast white widgets that make up the rest of the Morgan Dollar population. And it would be easy enough for the TPG to provide this info on the reverse label (SP63-L67-S65-EA69). Furthermore, the weights don't have to remain static; the TPGs could change the way they weight each element of grading based on the series of coin that they are grading. For example, I submit that classic commemoratives which rarely if ever have very many surface marks should not have surface preservation taking up 40% of the grading process. Strike, luster, and eye appeal are much more important in grading commemorative coins. The end result would be a set of standards that were still subjective, but were applied in a logical and consistent way and accompanied by transparency that would reassure the TPG customer base.[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Precision grading
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...