Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 1107517, member: 112&quot;]I wasn&#039;t trying to bait you into anything. But there is no way that grading standards can start at the bottom and go up. For one thing, if you start at the bottom how do you know what details are missing ? You don&#039;t start with a blank planchet, add a tiny amount of detail and say this is G - and then go from there. Nor do you cover it with contact marks and then erase some. Or have no luster whatsoever and add some.</p><p><br /></p><p>You start at the top, the very top. You take what a coin is supposed to look like based on the design and grade it downwards from there. That is how the standards are created.</p><p><br /></p><p>I will say this much though. When one is actually grading a coin, it is imperative that the coin must first meet all of the criteria of the lower standards first, and only then can check the coin to see if it meets the standards of the next higher grade. When the coin fails to meet the standards of the next higher grade, then you know have found the correct grade for the coin. I have explained this many, many times in the past.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now if that is what you are trying to say, fine we agree. The point I was making in my original post is this. This coin serves as an example to show folks what the detail, luster, strike etc etc is supposed to look like. For it is only by knowing what it is supposed to look like that one can judge what is missing on other coins.[/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