Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 2098908, member: 15309&quot;]You omitted the one object that is at the center of the debate.&nbsp; If you are calling it an innocent oversight, I will accept that given your advanced age (hehehe).&nbsp; Now hold the phone.&nbsp; So what you are saying is that &quot;coin to coin&quot; friction is responsible for both luster grazes and &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; but that luster grazes don&#039;t disturb the metal enough to be considered wear.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>That theory is flawed.&nbsp; The result of &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; has nothing to do with repetition, rather where the coin is located in the bag.&nbsp; Coins at the bottom and in the middle will exhibit more friction than those on top because of increased pressure.&nbsp; Furthermore, I never said that bag marks are equivalent to wear.&nbsp; However, we accept that bag marks will vary in size, accepting &quot;coin to coin&quot; friction in different levels of severity only makes sense.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>It is your contention that incomplete strike does not look exactly like wear.&nbsp; The reason you give is that the color and texture are different.&nbsp; When the TPGs apply the same standard for &quot;roll/bag friction,&quot;&nbsp; you claim that the color difference is indiscernible.&nbsp; Read your statement above in red.&nbsp; If it can be done with respect to incomplete strike, it can be done with respect to &quot;roll/bag friction.&quot;&nbsp; And just like there is a texture difference between wear and weak strike, so it holds for &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; as well.&nbsp; You described wear as smooth and flat, &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; has a glossy appearance where the luster still &quot;rolls&quot; when tilted in a good light source.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>In order to make your argument make sense, you have resorted to classifying luster grazes as a type of bag mark.&nbsp; You can&#039;t be serious!&nbsp; Luster grazes occur the exact same way that &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; occurs, a sliding motion between 2 coins.&nbsp; The design and relief of the coin will determine whether or not the result of this sliding is luster grazes or &quot;roll/bag friction.&quot;&nbsp; Additionally, the sentence in red in your post above clearly describes how a bag mark is different than a luster graze.&nbsp; You can&#039;t describe how they are created differently and then classify them the same.&nbsp; They are not the same, and PCGS recognizes that they are not the same.&nbsp; PCGS treats luster grazes the exact same whey they treat &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; (see quote below).</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>That quote comes from the Chapter 3: GRADING TECHNIQUES AND TECHNICAL GRADING:&nbsp; Technical Versus Market Grading:&nbsp; Silver Coins.&nbsp; This is the part where PCGS explains the specific application of market grading with respect to each series.&nbsp; <b>Their admission that they are market grading coins with luster grazes means that under technical grading, coins with luster grazes would be considered AU.</b></p><p><br /></p><p>Now if the beginning of your most recent post, you admitted that both luster grazes and &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; are the result of coin to coin friction.&nbsp; You astutely pointed out that the difference between the two is a matter of degree.&nbsp; Under your method, market grading a coin with luster grazes as a mint state coin is acceptable.&nbsp; The coin shown below is a GSA NGC 1881-CC MS66+.</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?set=path%5B1%2F2%2F1%2F7%2F7%2F12177429%5D%2Csizedata%5B840x2000%5D&amp;call=url%5Bfile%3Aproduct.chain%5D" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Under the TPG method, market grading a coin with &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; as a mint state coin is acceptable (see example below).</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="https://www.cointalk.com/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cointalk.com%2Fproxy.php%3Fimage%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fdyn1.heritagestatic.com%252Flf%253Fset%253Dpath%25255B1%25252F2%25252F1%25252F8%25252F8%25252F12188176%25255D%25252Csizedata%25255B840x2000%25255D%2526call%253Durl%25255Bfile%25253Aproduct.chain%25255D%26hash%3D0b6f4aea86646ea28e167e0245e18cb4&amp;hash=5341e54f66874156d79065bd810cf894" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>The crux of this issue is that you find the friction on the Morgan Dollar acceptable, but you find the friction on the Saint egregious.&nbsp; While you are welcome to your opinion, there is nothing inherently unreasonable about thinking that the friction found on that Saint is less distracting than that on the Morgan Dollar.&nbsp; And that is basically the crux of the reason why the numismatic community has accepted the market grading of coins that display &quot;roll/bag friction.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Now I know your objection to their expansion of this market grading principle is that it is impossible to definitively determine that the friction came from &quot;coin to coin&quot; contact as opposed to friction with some other object.&nbsp; Yet you freely accept market grading coins with weak strike.&nbsp; A comparison of the grading principles used with respect to weak strike and &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; are essentially identical.</p><p><br /></p><p>1)&nbsp; Both weak strike and &quot;roll/bag friction&quot; are predictable by series and only occur on very specific areas of the design.&nbsp; For example:&nbsp; Morgan Dollars (Above the ear--weak strike), Saints (Breast &amp; knee--roll/bag friction), Walkers (Miss Liberty&#039;s leg--weak strike), SLQs (Miss Liberty&#039;s leg--roll/bag friction).</p><p><br /></p><p>2)&nbsp; Both display color differences that separate them from wear.&nbsp; As an example, PCGS states that &quot;Upon observing real wear on a Saint, one notices the brown grayish look as opposed to the bright look of coin against coin friction.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>3)&nbsp; Both have texture properties that differ from wear.&nbsp; Incomplete strike will often exhibit a granular texture related to planchet roughness whereas wear is flat, dull, and smooth.&nbsp; &quot;Roll/Bag friction&quot; has an glossy appearance where the luster still rolls.</p><p><br /></p><p>Again, it is your prerogative to accept none, some, or all of these market grading principles as a collector.&nbsp; But to tell those who accept the market grading principles employed by the TPGs that they are wrong simply because they are different than the standards that you accept is unacceptable.&nbsp; Coin grading is subjective, there is no right or wrong despite what you might believe.[/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