Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 1445184, member: 15309&quot;]When put that way, yes I would have to admit that they have loosened, but certainly not drastically or intentionally.&nbsp; I think that one of the major adjustments that has not yet been discussed is the stoppage of grade limiters.&nbsp; I don&#039;t know if you remember but I started a thread a few years ago about marks in the focal area of a coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>Read more: <a href="http://www.cointalk.com/t110657/#ixzz1vMe37aKj" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.cointalk.com/t110657/#ixzz1vMe37aKj">http://www.cointalk.com/t110657/#ixzz1vMe37aKj</a></p><p><br /></p><p>IMO, that is one of the very best threads in the history of this forum and should be required reading for all aspiring numismatists.&nbsp; Doug pointed out that in the TPG grading standards for an MS65 coin:</p><p><br /></p><p><span style="color: #FF0000">MS65: Gem Uncirculated There may be some scattered marks, hairlines, or other minor defects. If the flaws are in a main focal area, they must be minor and few. Hidden marks and hairlines can be larger. On dime-type and smaller, they almost always must be in the devices or must be very minor if they are in the fields. On larger coins, there can be marks/hailines in the fields and in the devices, but no major ones.</span></p><p><br /></p><p>The general consensus in the thread is that the standard is ambiguous and allows for multiple interpretations.&nbsp; Doug views them quite differently and sees absolutely no ambiguity.&nbsp; Now let&#039;s look at the coin that I used in that thread again.</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o59/ACPitBoss/Morgan%20Dollars%204%20Sale/MD1899-ONGCMS65.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Doug&#039;s strict interpretation of that standard requires that the coin be graded no higher than MS64.&nbsp; And I believe that in the beginning, the TPG&#039;s followed that standard in much the same way that Doug does.&nbsp; The problem is that the coin in question would be MS66 quality save that lone mark on the cheek.&nbsp; As the TPG&#039;s evolved they realized that the strict interpretation was causing there to be too much of a disparity with coins of the same grade.&nbsp; After all, the coin shown above looks much better than most MS64&#039;s and the MS67 Morgan Dollar posted by Raider in that thread looks better than any MS65 I have ever seen.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I firmly believe that the TPG&#039;s stopped following the practice of grade limiting features including marks, strike, or luster (too a lesser extent).&nbsp; And based upon the remarks made by both Mark Feld and Tom Bush in that thread, the market accepts holistic grading because it applies more fairly to a greater range of coins than a strict interpretation of the grading standards.&nbsp; So the TPG&#039;s have made adjustments over the years in order to ensure that the exceptions to the rules were graded fairly.&nbsp; The problem is that such grading bothers the purists like Doug and gives the perception that the grading standards have changed.[/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