Options
Old School fundamentals of Grading. How have they changed?
braddick
Posts: 24,744 ✭✭✭✭✭
I remember as a kid I'd "studying" grading by reading the Red Book. In it would be the descriptors needed for each grade. There was also a book, somewhat the size of the Blue Book yet tan I think, that would have line drawings of each coin in various states of wear/grade. Example: remember when it was stated in these books, "At least three letters must show in LIBERTY must show for the Fine grade" (on Barber halves and quarters)?
With the possible changing of grading and from strict, distinctive rules in play to more or less fundamental and market grading standards, what has changed that you support and what has been altered that you are apposed to?
peacockcoins
2
Comments
Brown & Dunn grading guide.
I'm not a fan of "commercial grading". I think coins should be graded, then have descriptors as to color, strike, luster type. Now coins are given the grade corresponding to what price they would sell for. Many MS68 coins are just MS64s or 65s with nice colors. And even though a coin with a little wear gets a grade of AU58, but sells for more than an MS60 does not mean it should be graded MS62.
The grading guide you are thinking of is Brown & Dunn. They were the standard for a while.
Fan of the Oxford Comma
CCAC Representative of the General Public
2021 Young Numismatist of the Year
I would also eliminate most of the MS grades and go back to what I first saw in the late 70's: MS-60, MS-63, MS-65 and MS-67 at most. Instead, there are now plus grades and even more granularity with CAC. The differences are numismatically trivial but are financially important because of the exorbitantly inflated price level on so many US coins.
Brown & Dunn. That's it! I loved and cherrished that book although some of the drawings didn't seem to match up with the description. Thanks for posting the book title.
Thinking back, I remember bidding for large cents on local coin shop bid boards (lived in the San Jose area at the time, back in the late 60's, early 70's) and having a dealer tell me what the difference was between a good and a VG. He would also show me early large cents in AU and MS and I was so amazed as the details on these better coins were just never seen on the lower grade ones and it was a treat, even then at a tender age to hold one of these in the palm of your hand.
peacockcoins
I do not like seeing AU coins in MS holders.
Taking strike characteristics and overall details into consideration was a plus, up to a point.
The old 'must have a FULL horn for a buffalo nickel to grade VF' was tough.
I've seen MS 26D's that didn't have a full horn. What should those grade - F15?
But then the services went too far, and soon you saw coins in VF holders that
have less than half a horn, and none of the obverse details needed to be VF.
The same can be said for other series as well, like walkers and IHCs.
We must stop using the term 'standards' when referring to grading. A standard is a clearly defined, measurable, repeatable criteria. What we have are guidelines that are blurred with opinions. Then the impossible 'eye appeal' is added......Really?? Think of art, or the facial features of men or women.... What appeals to one, may not appeal to another. No wonder people think that TPG's are 'tight' during some periods and more relaxed at other times. And 'market acceptable'- just another qualifying opinion that further deteriorates any semblance of a 'standard'. Our grading 'opinions' do generally fall within a certain range of agreement. Just read the many GTG threads... the differences are partially due to skill levels, but even more due to 'opinions' and what one deems 'appealing' as opposed to the opinion of another more critical viewer. The market will eventually demand real standards, AI will be introduced, and sanity will rule..... someday.
Cheers, RickO
Well said, Ricko!
Those grade numbers need to go and be retired to the dustbin of history. The only number that's of real importance to collectors and dealers should be the price.
Bigger grade number=better coin? Not really.
Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Old school grading, an example:
Grade when buying: Fine
Same coin, when selling: Very Fine
The government should call in all collector coins and grind them down to a uniform appearance so everyone would be equal.
I first learned to grade using the Brown and Dunn book and then an early 1990s version of James Ruddy's Photograde. Insofar as lower circulated coins are concerned, there are many differences. I remember when a full rim was required for a good grade. Scratched coins were put in body bags usually. Many of today's XFs especially Barber material reminds me of yesterdays VFs. Yesterdays XFs seem like today's AUs to me across the board. All of the keys seem to have increased by at least a grade or two.
And there was no CAC then of course. One professional grading opinion was enough. Those were the days.
Ricko nailed it with his reply, TPG's should be grading coins not pricing them. But I suspect it will be impossible to put that genie back in the bottle.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
AI will be introduced, and sanity will rule..... someday
why, thank you, RickO!!!
that's a funny little typo.
as I have said before, I know the truth and common sense are being spoken when my friend posts more than a line or two in response.
I've seen fully lustrous, 100% original, Branch Mint Buffalo nickels with hardly any horn visible. Once coins as this get a little friction they appear to be in Fine condition, Grading is an art.
The top TPGS's took a huge step forward with "Detail" grading. I think the pendulum will gradually swing back to tighter standards that are closer to the "No Trace of Wear" standard. The establishment of CAC was a step in that direction, Unfortunately, they did not go far enough. One day, as prices continue to rise, my dream of some indication (sticker, new company, label color) that a coin is in Full Mint State will come to pass.
None of this would be necessary if the "powers to be" take a coin's VALUE (the corruptive factor in the grading system) out of the equation. Grade the extremely rare coin AU (rather than MS) yet price it at millions of dollars.
This solution to 90% of the grading problems/disagreements (ignorance is the other 10%) is so simple that it will never be done.
Actually, it could happen overnight. All it would take is a label change and an announcement by the top two services that coins would be graded exclusively by their condition of preservation. Then a perfectly original frosty Morgan dollar with a completely flat strike and a few hidden tiny hits could be graded in the highest grade range although it would sit in the dealer's case with a low price.
What would be the point of "grading" coins, if the grade was completely independent of value?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
@Baley
Trying to put a value on a coin with a grade # was a great idea in prehistoric times when folks could not easily SEE A COIN! Today, market savvy folks can look at a coin or its image and get a pretty good feeling for what it is worth. Perhaps that is where the advice: "Buy the coin and not the label" originated. What do you think?
The point of a third party Grade is to be able to look up the Value in a price guide, by being able to rank the overall Quality of a specific specimen among the known population.
It defeats the purpose to have a "grade" that does not reflect the Quality, or for the Quality to not at least approximately indicate the market value.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
If the Market Buyers are so smart, why do they need a Label at all?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
As an aside, how funny that we keep having versions of this debate, since you are a career third party grader, and i have never spent a cent getting a coin "graded", and almost always crack out coin purchases that were certified.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Any top TPG would be committing financial suicide if they were to make a move like that. Not only would they irk and lose most if not all their dealer support base (read that as their revenue stream) such a move would have ripple effects thru other areas such as the registry. Can you imagine the turmoil and ciaos that would happen when all the millionaires top sets are displaced with new low priced top pop coins. Worse than dogs and cats living together lol.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
one coin in my collection I traced to a catalog 20 or so years ago, where it was sold raw. Described there as choice XF. It is now in a 61 holder
@coinbuf
At one time, a major grading service's coins grading MS-65 became MS-63's almost overnight. They are still in business today.
Here is a "News Flash" for you: If the #1 TPGS did practically anything they wished (adopted a 100 point system with decimal grading and colored labels with a Disney Character used to signify the service tier) YOUR LIFE, MY LIFE, and the NUMISMATIC MARKETPLACE would not change significantly in spite of the howls of pain from the peanut gallery!
ROTFL!
Yeah, Very nice in THEORY. I guess that's why coins with the same date, mint, and grade all sell for the same
price! in auction and at coin shows. Oh wait, THEY DON'T!
I like the way the British do it. They will describe the amount of detail and grade it such, then add, "As Struck" to let you know that the "1924-S Buffalo Nickel is in VF condition, as struck". It will bring more money than a circulated VF, but not uncirculated money because it is missing the required details. Some series have dates that are not fully struck, and while technically uncirculated, they have circulated coin details.
Or,
Coin shop selling: Choice BU
TPG grading: AU details, whizzed
Coin shop buying: "No, thanks. I've already got too much inventory"
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1