Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Leadfoot, post: 1540459, member: 2972&quot;]Every single TPG-graded MS St. Gaudens I&#039;ve ever seen has some high point wear.&nbsp; Every single one.&nbsp; Will someone suggest I&#039;ve not seen thousands of them in-hand?</p><p><br /></p><p>Geting past that, it is not fair to compare the ANA and PCGS standards.&nbsp; They are vastly different in theory (technical versus market grading) and specifically with respect to AU and MS coins.&nbsp; The only way I can describe the distinction that PCGS uses is NOT high point wear, but rather field luster wear, as the distinguishing feature between AU and MS coins.&nbsp; PCGS is not consistent with respect to their written descriptions, and I know some point to that as a shortcoming of their standards, but that doesn&#039;t mean they aren&#039;t consistent in practice, which, frankly, is far more important.</p><p><br /></p><p>Lastly, I will leave you all with this question:&nbsp; If the ANA standards are so much better, why does practically nobody use them any more?</p><p><br /></p><p>Respectfully...Mike</p><p><br /></p><p>p.s. Paul &amp; G, Please stop with the personal attacks and remain on topic.&nbsp; This is an important topic that would be that much better if you all would put your personal differences aside. You are both very knowledgeable numismatists who happen to disagree -- can&#039;t you disagree without the personal attacks?&nbsp;&nbsp; Thanks for your consideration.</p><p><br /></p><p>p.s.s. The first coin Paul posted above appears to be a 65 or 66, the second coin looks like a 63 or 58 to my eye.[/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