The Official CoinTalk Grading Experiment 5

I think he was implying that the overdate gave the coin a rarity similar to key date status, which is often rewarded withe a grade bump.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Well my friend sorry I bugged you! When you collected coins as long as I have then "you" can take issues or be bugged.
You less than half my age in fact could well be a son or grandson....so after you reach my age or have been a collector for 56 years plus and have the knowlege of that time and experence then grasshopper snatch the penny from my hand....until then yes your entitled to your opinion,
But like advise ,or opinons they are a dime a dozen and don't matter a rats butt to this collector.

 

Correct Paul.... and this has been an off and on practice for years.
As posted above I've been in this hobby 56 years, I'm no expert , but far from a dummy on this subject matter.
To be perfectly honest I've always taken issue with TPG ,and now CAC!
From my experence in this hobby as a child, though teen and college years I never trusted nothing but my eye.
And to this day I trust nothing but my eyes.slabs,stickers mean absolut nada! As I have purchased many a sweet coin under graded by a TPG.,
But have seem millions more of over graded mis graded specimens ,as well varieties that were completely missed.

 

I'm fully aware that key dates get graded softly, but I'm not aware of too many varieties which receive the same treatment (maybe a 1955/55 Lincoln, but probably not a simple overdate like this).

However, like you, I'm strongly against the practice. I see absolutely no reason why an 1895S should be graded any differently than an 1878 Morgan.

And that's why I don't buy key dates....

 

But you can’t grade across series like that.

Best example I can think of is a 1922 No D.

The coin is not graded like other Lincoln Cents. In fact, the 22 No D is generally graded by the reverse.

If you grade across series, all of the highest grade Morgan Dollars would have been produced in San Francisco between 1880 and 1882.

 

Let me clarify, because this is a subtle point: I've made peace with grading based on the production values of a coin. Many Lincolns of the 20's and 30's are known for abysmal strikes. Many O-mint Morgans have awful strikes. Many S-mint Franklins have awful strikes. I'm now ok with grading a coin based on the date/mintmark based on how that issue is known to appear. A "good" strike for a 1953S would be an absolutely horrific strike for a 1948D Franklin. I can adjust for that.

Even this is somewhat of a controversial opinion. I can see arguments both ways. If the details aren't there, they just aren't there - for a certain series, these are the details required for a 65 strike grade, and some dates just won't ever get there. Technical graders often grade this way - certain dates just won't ever make 66 because they just don't ever come struck that well. I can see where they're coming from, but this is not how modern grading works.

What I'm saying is, assuming all other things are equal, I absolutely don't want a really rare issue to be graded differently than a really common date just because it's a rare date. A 1909S VDB should be graded exactly the same as a 1909S Lincoln. One is worth multiples of the other.... but the production values are basically the same. Therefore, the grading should be the same. However, looking at graded examples I believe it is clear that they are not. This is where I often disagree with the TPG grades.

 

And I agree 100% and please understand this....as us old farts aren't trying to say our way is correct.....but in 1963 there were no TPGs.
You went to shops, coin club meetings, shows, you took guidance from your elders who like many of us here only want to share the knowlege we have managed to retain over the years.
True this hobby has evolved but like everything else in life sometimes for the better,sometimes not!
I am no expert even in the field I've worked in for 53 years....yes I know alot have all sorts of awards, etc...in my field but in life one needs to learn daily....be it any subject matter.
I'm sure most of us seniors here would be so happy to try and share all we seen not only in nummistics but life in general.
Everyone here are human......the jury is still out on Doug...lol....so we are subject to mistakes and making them....is that a bad thing....I think not.....as thought out life I can assure you I have learned more from my mistakes than triphumps.
That's the reason I'm so smart..... mistakes have made more than my share....and everyone a life lesson learned....yup school of hard knocks....my almata .

 

The blown up picture is a totally different picture, not a magnification. It's also not a very good one. The most perceptive will have learned not only that consistency helps when comparing coin photos, but also that it's important when viewing coins in hand.

 

I'm absolutely not knocking your experience! I also fully understand that pre-1985, things were done quite a bit differently than they are today. I've only been collecting seriously for 22 years, so I don't have quite the historical perspective that some of you have (although I have many more years than many members). And, I think one of the most valuable parts of a forum like this is learning from the experience of people who've been involved for a long time.

All that being said, things have definitely evolved, as you mention.

Grading has evolved more than just about any other field of numismatics. In 1963, the ANA had not even begun to consider publishing their grading standards. The people involved in creating TPGs were kids. Shoot, even QDB was just a youngster then. Numismatics has evolved. We can't forget our history, but to succeed in the modern market we have to understand how modern grading practices influence TPG grades. I'd like to think these were fairly static, but I think we can all agree that even these fluctuate. This, more than any other point, is where certain prominent members get twisted around the axle.

The whole point of these threads is to compare CoinTalk's grading to the TPG's. I want to see how we grade differently, perhaps figure out why, and if possible align ourselves to the "standards". Right or wrong, disagree or not, the TPG's are the ones who rule the hobby.

I think you and I can both agree that if you try to collect today the same way that you did in 1963, you're going to be seriously frustrated.

 

We've all seen an AU58 that was well struck, few bag marks, and may even have attractive toning, but the slightest amount of wear/rub which prevents a MS designation. On the other hand, we've seen some baggy, poorly struck, etc...coins that are graded low MS. (60-63)
I guess my question is as the TPGS continue to "evolve" grading standards.
Will we see AU60 (or better) grades on the label to "market grade" those coins, or are there some situations that have lines which cannot be crossed.

I know, hypothetical, and a little crazy to think. But...

 

Any coin with visible wear must be graded AU-58 or lower. Those are the rules.

That being said, an attractive AU-58 may often be worth far more than an ugly MS-62 or 63.

It gets more complicated than that, but I'll leave that discussion for another thread. It gets contentious.

 

Your statements are 100% correct by my standards.
The TPG do rule... and that does not make me happy.
In the 60's besides finding a 50 D nickel in change lol....one could possibly find a 16 D in my collection bag was all silver dimes,quarters, halfs.... not uncommon to find war nickels worn as well buffalos. In my pocket a rubber banded wad of bills ,
U.S. notes, silvery cert. So yes the 1960's and a good part of the 70's finding sweet coins .
But like other things in life one can deciede to either follow the pack or travel your own road.....I place little faith in TPG. Yes I own slabs but more so own what's inside as I only buy a slab if everything aligns. I buy what MY eyes say....I just posted a few days ago this yes I've been fooled on 2 gold coins yes they were real gold...no they were fake!
I know alot of dealers if I asked them have they ever been taken by a fake coin?
If they said no I be unlikely to buy from them....as no matter how good you believe yourself to be...there's always a chance back then as well present day to buy or be sold a fake.
At the end of the day it's a hobby..it should be fun! However it's only fun if you have some sort of knowlege .
The YN 's in this forum no matter age need to realize this hobby requires One to learn..now if putting little round disc in an album is your thing, and you believe that your a collector....well you are....by definition ,but your limiting yourself and time spent in this hobby. You'll soon tire and loose interest.

 

Some of the best looking coins are Au. And I take an Au.58 any day over anything below a 63....depending of course eye appeal.

 

I believe that we both agree that the value of a coin should have absolutely no affect on its grade.

 

That is what I assumed he meant and it is complete nonsense.

 

I'm glad to hear you've been enjoying the hobby for a long time and I'm sure you have lots of wisdom and I'm not questioning that. But it is nonsense to suggest that an over date can bump a grade and I'd expect you, with all your experience, to know that the notion doesn't even make sense. The over date is not a feature of the coin - like strike strength, luster, toning, etc. You don't bump a grade because it is a better date. The date has absolutely nothing to do with the grade. No grader looks at an MS 63 1916-D Mercury Dime and goes, "Well it's definitely a 63, but its a freaking key date - I'm going with 64!" Often, in practice, I think the opposite can be true. On rare pieces, TPGs will be especially tough on the key dates with low populations in certain high grades in order to protect the value of the already certified coins and not dilute the grade.

 

Keep drinking the kool ade......what nonsence is people who don't question authority , and yes that's wisdom from the 60's that still stands true today.
And in this case since the power over the hobby has been handed to the TPG's as well the belief that once someone tells you it's a ms 64 you need full quanfication by placing a sticker on a slab.
And grades are bumped for many reasons....mostly cash!

 

A little ed wood for ya, should be a slider, there is enough evidence for circulation.

 

This is wrong. Maybe they shouldn't... but they do. Very frequently.

 

I’m in full agreement