Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 904739, member: 15309&quot;]Doug,</p><p><br /></p><p>You are confusing me a little.&nbsp; It seems that you have been advocating the established standards for grading which say that <b>YES</b>, a significant mark in a prime focal area would prevent a gem grade.&nbsp; I assume that you meant to say the answer is <b>YES</b>.</p><p><br /></p><p>This whole discussion really boils down to how we interpret the grading standards.&nbsp; You interpret them to clearly mean that any major mark in a prime focal area of the coin limits the grade.&nbsp; Others including both Tom, Mark, Raider,&nbsp; and myself believe that their is intentional ambiguity in the established standards that allow for exceptions to be made to the general rule.</p><p><br /></p><p>I think we can all agree that under normal circumstances, a significant mark in a prime focal area will limit the grade of the coin to MS64.&nbsp; However, there are rare instances that a coin will have a significant mark in a focal area but otherwise display the characteristics of a superb premium gem coin.&nbsp; Raider&#039;s Morgan is a good example even though I disagree with the assigned grade of MS67 which means they ignored the mark completely.</p><p><br /></p><p>IMO, adhering to firm rules will result in just as many improperly graded coins as are from using a holistic grading method.&nbsp; There is no written standard that can account for all of the different variables that occur while grading coins.&nbsp; Without ambiguity in the standards, our grading efforts face inevitable failure.</p><p><br /></p><p>Paul[/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