The Official Coin Talk Grading Experiment 3

As usual, I’m one point low at MS 63... still in the conservative grader mode.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Well... I was off. The coin seemed lacking in luster to me. I assumed it had been dipped and would be penalized for that.

 

This. If you post a dime or half dime, this effect will become more pronounced. People need to remember how coins are graded and back away from their monitors a bit.

 

I'm on a roll! I agree with your assessment of why MS64. As for the concensus being 1.9 points low, it made me wonder about the way grades are simply ranked numerically in general (not simply for this study). When we assign a grade, we are projecting a the quality of a coin from the 4-dimensional "hypercube of quality" (surfaces, strike, luster, eye appeal) to a 1-dimensional grade. The "surfaces" dimension of that is actually a little more complicated, in that not only can they be worn, but they can be beat up -- two separate, mostly independent continua. You constantly hear that AU58 is typically nicer than MS61, as it is an MS62-63 coin that has a touch of wear noticeable on it. Heck, my broadstruck 21-S Morgan is a 65 with a touch of rub on it. An MS61 with wear shouldn't grade better than 55, and a worn MS60 would grade 53. Something similar might also be observable for XF45 (an AU53 with a little too much wear) and VF35 (an XF45 with too much wear). It would seem that what we think of as a wear continuum between 1 and 58 sometimes isn't. Mathematically, it would almost be like saying x - 1 + 1 does not necessarily equal x. For example, take away one aspect that knocked a coin down to AU53, and it doesn't necessarily go up to AU55, it may go up to MS61. What does this mean for the study? Probably almost nothing, since trying to figure out everyone's interpretation of how AU58 ranks within a grading scale would be folly, but it wouldn't be unrealistic to put AU58 above MS61. If I do this, the average grade becomes 62.5. Food for thought on a Monday morning.

 

I'd like to change my grade now.
I really thought they would be more lenient on this type. The first two I was under by 1, this one over by 1.
I'm amateur at grading, but MS, or AU coins are so much easier to grade than the lower levels to me.

 

MS60. I almost thought AU because the obverse looks like it's been rubbed a little bit, but I'm sticking with MS60.

 

Damn. The answer had already been posted...

 

I guessed MS65. I feel pretty good about that because it did get graded MS64+ at least once.

As @messydesk said, this is a pretty common problem with GTG attempts in general. I would also expect people to do better with larger coins than smaller coins for this reason. Maybe having the full slab shot, as someone else suggested before, would help.

Congratulations! You just re-invented EAC grading.

 

You have hit the nail squarely on the head. This is why, when I explain my grades on GTG's like this, I attempt to use my SLEC method - Strike, Luster, Eye Appeal, and Contact marks. I like to break down each grade, and then explain how I arrived at a single overall grade. Each facet must be analyzed individually. In the long run, I'd love to see the TPG's do this as well.... but that'll never happen.

 

I went 63 on this one. Like last stated on exp 1. I couldn't see the luster until the slab photo.

Excited to see the next coin, Thanks @physics-fan3.14

 

Without looking at the results above, I voted MS-64. The piece has some of the characteristics of a better grade, but there are several little tick marks on the fields that bring it down. I am also not a fan of the toning spot and "carbon spot" in the bustline area. That was the final factor that took it out of the MS-65 grade for me.