Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="KBBPLL, post: 26650314, member: 104064"]This immediately made me think of the Yosemite Decimal System for grading rock climbing routes. In the way back time when I dabbled in it, there was just 5.10, 5.11 etc routes. Then they added a, b, c, d to distinguish finer degrees of difficulty between similar routes. You can see that they've done the same with the other ranking systems by adding + and -. You can also see that the 5.15d level is labeled "not human." I think they decided that 5.15 was going to be the absolute end of the scale after adding 5.13 or 5.14 over the years as people started actually climbing more and more absurdly impossible routes. Now someone has climbed a 5.15d and what do they do (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silence_(climb)" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silence_(climb)" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silence_(climb)</a> ). It's similar to the MS70 coin grade that they now give out like candy. With circulated coins, before we start doing a, b, c, d, we can start using the numerical grades already available. Why is there no AU56 or AU57? I think we've all seen coins that are better than 55 but not quite 58. And doesn't CAC kind of do this already, giving their sticker on "A" and "B" coins for the grade, but not "C"? Rock climbing scales: [ATTACH=full]1700159[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]