Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;imrich, post: 1505375, member: 22331&quot;]<b>Changing Grading Standards?</b></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I believe if one is to determine whether written technical (or other - market) standards have changed over the years, they need only to read published &quot;A.N.A. GRADING&quot; technical standards, available in my library.</p><p><br /></p><p>My first edition Copyright 1977 varies appreciably from the fourth edition published virtually a decade afterwards (Copyright 1987, 1991).</p><p><br /></p><p>For the Standing Liberty Quarter which was specified as an example in this thread, neither the first nor the fourth published standards have a grading standard for MS66 grade. However, they do have an MS-65 Standard, thus in first edition: No trace of wear; nearly as perfect as MS-70 except for small blemish. Has <u>full mint luster</u> but may be unevenly toned or lightly finger-marked. A few <u>barely noticeable</u> nicks or marks may be present. The fourth edition (10 years later) had interjected an MS-67 grade which was now defined as being more flawed than the MS-70, which the past MS-65 grade was &quot;nearly as perfect&quot; too. The MS-65 grade was now &quot;nearly as perfect&quot; as the new MS-67 more flawed grade. </p><p><br /></p><p>Standards have been diminished, with TPG generating standards that in my opinion, definitely diminishedly vary from the A.N.A. reduced published standards. At a point where I discerned grievous declines in GEM grading of Standing Liberty Quarters, I submitted a request thus to NGC: &quot;I have collected numerous NGC graded coins in grades through MS67 FH, but haven&#039;t been able to locate your firms grading standards for the various &quot;Mint State&quot; grades. As a scientist I&#039;m certain you must have a written standard for this process, but others say not. How can I acquire your written standards for these grades?&quot; The response was as I surmised, there wasn&#039;t a written standard, explained thus:&nbsp; Thank you for your email.&nbsp; NGC grades coins by the Sheldon Grading scale. I&#039;m still searching for the Sheldon GEM Standing Liberty Quarter written standard.</p><p><br /></p><p>When I stated an exception to the &quot;Full Head&quot; designation earlier in this thread, it wasn&#039;t a criticism of CAC who basicly certified that this was one of the best that could be found graded at this level by a TPG without consistent (much less written) grading standards. I would expect a &quot;full head&quot; coin to be closer to this specimen: <a href="http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1128&amp;lotNo=1108#48764876285" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1128&amp;lotNo=1108#48764876285" rel="nofollow">http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1128&amp;lotNo=1108#48764876285</a></p><p>This referenced specimen doesn&#039;t quite meet the published standard, thus: The leaves in hair are <u>well defined</u>; hairline along brow and across face <u>is complete</u>, small indentation at ear is visible. Cheek is rounded.</p><p><br /></p><p>I personally believe that CAC provides a positive service in a field of collectibles without consistent standards. </p><p><br /></p><p>Although I&#039;ve spent many years studying this unique design which has evaded consistent production capability, know the published standards, and the varying TPG standards, I use the CAC symbol as a guide to locate higher quality coins, and pay the premium when I concur.</p><p><br /></p><p>Just the observations of an &quot;old fool&quot;. :thumb:[/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