Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;NPCoin, post: 905421, member: 5629&quot;]On the flip-side, we do not and should not have the option of choosing <b>which</b> established standards (if any at all) others should be forced to follow.</p><p><br /></p><p>Of course, this causes great debate in the industry, as well as confusion, when referring to any given coin&#039;s condition and haggling a price and value for a coin during a sell.&nbsp; You may be trying to simplify the situation by implying a reference to only two or three standards for grading, but we already know there is a plethora of grading standards throughout the past handful of decades.</p><p><br /></p><p>Not everybody follows the same standards, and not everybody follows their proclaimed standard of choice exactly nor consistently. I would personally attribute this to greed.&nbsp; Yet, regardless, we must also realize that there are many that have been in the industry for many decades now, and not all of them are &quot;recognized experts&quot;.&nbsp; It is not the &quot;recognized experts&quot; that determine the standards - it is the individual collector and dealer - the ones who are actively making the market.</p><p><br /></p><p>It is their own personal philosophy and standard that prevails.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now, that is not to say that an individual may not choose to follow a specific standard, whether it be by published or apparent standards used by PCGS or NGC, the ANA Standards (in all of its delicious flavors), Ruddy&#039;s Photograding, Halperin&#039;s NCI standard, the ACCUGRADE standard, classic Brown&amp;Dunn Standards, Yeoman Redbook guidelines, Heritage standards, and the list goes on and on; and follow said standard strictly and religiously.</p><p><br /></p><p>However, that is not the real world. In the real world, individuals have their own philosophies, and they will glean from that which has a tendency to agree with their philosophy.&nbsp; There is also subjectiveness.&nbsp; What is a major detraction to one, could be a borderline or minor detraction to another.</p><p><br /></p><p>In any case, it is important for individuals to identify which standard they follow, or at least validate their reasoning for a grade.&nbsp; That is one reason I really do not care to read the &quot;guess the grade&quot; posts.&nbsp; Reading through twenty-some replies of a number are meaningless unless the individual validates the standard they use and give a proper answer to their reasoning for assigning such a grade (or for disqualifying it from another).</p><p><br /></p><p>Any argument that any standard is antiquated is moot.</p><p><br /></p><p>As I said before, there are numismatists that have been in the industry for numerous decades.&nbsp; As new ideas and new standards come about, these individuals may or may not adhere and embrace the new philosophies.&nbsp; They may also simply incorporate and glean portions of these new &quot;standards&quot; into their own philosophy for grading.&nbsp; After time, you would now have a plethora of hybrid grading philosophies and individual standards that may look like this standard or that, but in truth are a completely different monster.</p><p><br /></p><p>That is why communication is important.&nbsp; As important as the differences in subjective matters of grading (especially eye appeal) are concerned, the most important aspect of discussing grade is the standard used.&nbsp; If you do not understand or recognize the standard of the one you are debating and conversing with is, and vice versa, then any debate on the matter produces nothing.</p><p><br /></p><p>One person will have one set of standards in mind, while the other may have a variant or totally different standard in mind.</p><p><br /></p><p>Open-mindedness is important in discussing grading in numismatics.&nbsp; If you take an MS-65 graded by PCGS and an MS-65 graded by DGS and try to compare the two and make a determination of which one is graded correctly and which one is not, you will be sorely disappointed.&nbsp; PCGS primarily grades on a skewed variant of the ANA standards while DGS grades primarily on Ruddy&#039;s photograding standards.&nbsp; You would be comparing apples to tangerines.</p><p><br /></p><p>Yet, at the same time, we cannot simply discount one or the other because we do not agree with the philosophy behind the standard. In the same way, we cannot discount an individual&#039;s grade simply because we do not agree with their philosophy.</p><p><br /></p><p>That is what debate is all about - discussing with open-mindedness to view your opponent&#039;s philosophy on a matter for the purpose of articulating a convincing rebuttal to turn them to your own.[/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