Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Conder101, post: 32229, member: 66&quot;]&lt; The 7 point grading system would SIMPLIFY things but would probably put the grading services out of business. &gt;</p><p><br /></p><p>And thiis would be a problem?&nbsp; In return for their services the grading firms have suced over half a billion dollars out of the coin market in the past twenty years for a bunch of plastic and just as must arguing and disagreement over grading as there was before they started.</p><p><br /></p><p>&lt; Numbers are quantitative! &gt;</p><p><br /></p><p>Only if they represent actual repeatable measurements.&nbsp; If it dosn&#039;t result from a measurement it is just a label the same as an adjective.</p><p><br /></p><p>&lt; Dr. Sheldon put numbers to grading almost 30 years before grading services entered the numismatic community. Numbers work! &gt;</p><p><br /></p><p>Sheldons numbers represented value ratios between grades on a grading scale that already existed.&nbsp; They did not describe the grading of the coins in any way, and just a few years after he stated them they no longer applied and became meaningless.&nbsp; Numbers did not work.</p><p><br /></p><p>&lt; Also the Sheldon scale first came out in 1949. Let&#039;s see...PCGS didn&#039;t slab there first coin till 1986. NGC followed a year later. Nope, can&#039;t agree that the Sheldon Scale was attributed to those nasty &quot;slabbers&quot;. They just used a scale that made sense because grades were quantified instead of a subjective desciptive terms like: slightest, faint, sharp, etc. &gt;</p><p><br /></p><p>But the &quot;Sheldon grading scale&quot; was developed by the ANA in 1977 and they were at the time doing coin certification and followed with grading using the &quot;Sheldon scale&quot; the following year.&nbsp; And actually the scale was not &quot;quantified&quot; nor did the numbers have any relationship to the actual condition of the coins.&nbsp; The ANA could have used any group of numbers for the various grades.&nbsp; Sheldons numbers were chosen simply because they had been used before and were familiar to a fair sized group of numismatists.&nbsp; (The early copper people and other numismatic scholars who were familiar with the history of the collectors of early copper.)[/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