Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;calcol, post: 2501023, member: 77639&quot;]Doug, </p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t have a problem with TPGs slabbing problem coins and accurately describing the problem on the slab.&nbsp; The rub (so to speak) is whether any grade can be assigned, either adjectival or numerical.&nbsp; Where we differ is that I think in many cases, an accurate adjectival grade can be assigned.&nbsp; I have a Roman Republic collection, and virtually all ancients would be problem coins if graded by standards applied to U.S. coins, yet they are assigned adjectival grades.&nbsp; Folks can dispute what the grade should be, but the assignment of some grade is routine.&nbsp; In the broad area of numismatics (and not just ancients), adjectival grades are often assigned to problem coins with little controversy. It&#039;s with U.S. coins, more than any other area, where the debate rages.</p><p><br /></p><p>As far as the present coin in the post is concerned, I think the dealer called it mint state based on lack of wear on the high points.&nbsp; Uncirculated or unworn would have been more accurate because it&#039;s definitely not in the state it was in when it left the mint.&nbsp; So you have a point there.&nbsp; However, because the problems were described, I don&#039;t see an intent to defraud.</p><p><br /></p><p>Cal[/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