Grading rationale

Halfpence

This may have been discussed before, but I’ve been wondering why grading services don’t include an explanation for their grade when they slab a coin. I think it would add to the uniqueness of each coin if there were an explicit explanation for the grade that accompanied the coin.

Desert Moon

Time is Money

TomB

Time. Cost. Liability.

coastaljerseyguy

Agree, but do they record their initial impressions on some internal document, (luster, strike, wear, eye appeal) to help confirm their final grade? Or is it a few minute look and feel and away we go with the grade?

MFeld

Even if grading companies were to do that, how much good would the following types of explanations do?

1887 50C PR65 Too many hairlines for a higher grade
1910 5c MS65 Luster isn’t vibrant enough for a higher grade
1904 S$ MS66 Too many small marks for a higher grade

If you don’t feel that the above would be sufficiently helpful, what would you like to see, instead?

coastaljerseyguy

@MFeld said:
Even if grading companies were to do that, how much good would the following types of explanations do?

1887 50C PR65 Too many hairlines for a higher grade
1910 5c MS65 Luster isn’t vibrant enough for a higher grade
1904 S$ MS66 Too many small marks for a higher grade

If you don’t feel that the above would be sufficiently helpful, what would you like to see, instead?

Mark,

Could there be some scale (H/M/L) or numeric representation (1 - X) for the 4 grading considerations. Lets say a 5 was the top score and the coin was MS.
Luster - 5
Eye Appeal - 3 ( some blotchy toning)
Strike - 3 (O mint mark)
Wear/Bagginess - 4
Other ?

Let's say the above coin grade = MS 65 or however the TPGs arrive at the grade. I may be considering an MS65 to buy & appreciate luster more so than strike & a few more bag marks. I could now separate the coin grade from an MS 65 with less marks, better strike but subdued luster. I know you can determine these on your own if you can view in hand, but that is sometimes not possible.

gumby1234

@Halfpence you mean something like this?

ANACS photogrades used to do this back in the day.

jmlanzaf

@coastaljerseyguy said:

@MFeld said:
Even if grading companies were to do that, how much good would the following types of explanations do?

1887 50C PR65 Too many hairlines for a higher grade
1910 5c MS65 Luster isn’t vibrant enough for a higher grade
1904 S$ MS66 Too many small marks for a higher grade

If you don’t feel that the above would be sufficiently helpful, what would you like to see, instead?

Mark,

Could there be some scale (H/M/L) or numeric representation (1 - X) for the 4 grading considerations. Lets say a 5 was the top score and the coin was MS.
Luster - 5
Eye Appeal - 3 ( some blotchy toning)
Strike - 3 (O mint mark)
Wear/Bagginess - 4
Other ?

Let's say the above coin grade = MS 65 or however the TPGs arrive at the grade. I may be considering an MS65 to buy & appreciate luster more so than strike & a few more bag marks. I could now separate the coin grade from an MS 65 with less marks, better strike but subdued luster. I know you can determine these on your own if you can view in hand, but that is sometimes not possible.

NGC does this with ancients.

But grading also involves a holistic view of the coin.

jmlanzaf

I don't want to pay $150 for every coin submission. You pay for their opinion. You aren't paying them to teach you how to grade.

MFeld

@coastaljerseyguy said:

@MFeld said:
Even if grading companies were to do that, how much good would the following types of explanations do?

1887 50C PR65 Too many hairlines for a higher grade
1910 5c MS65 Luster isn’t vibrant enough for a higher grade
1904 S$ MS66 Too many small marks for a higher grade

If you don’t feel that the above would be sufficiently helpful, what would you like to see, instead?

Mark,

Could there be some scale (H/M/L) or numeric representation (1 - X) for the 4 grading considerations. Lets say a 5 was the top score and the coin was MS.
Luster - 5
Eye Appeal - 3 ( some blotchy toning)
Strike - 3 (O mint mark)
Wear/Bagginess - 4
Other ?

Let's say the above coin grade = MS 65 or however the TPGs arrive at the grade. I may be considering an MS65 to buy & appreciate luster more so than strike & a few more bag marks. I could now separate the coin grade from an MS 65 with less marks, better strike but subdued luster. I know you can determine these on your own if you can view in hand, but that is sometimes not possible.

Sure, there could be, but I think it would be time consuming and costly. And I suspect that there would still be pretty much the same differences of opinion, second guessing, inconsistencies, etc.

jmlanzaf

@MFeld said:

@coastaljerseyguy said:

@MFeld said:
Even if grading companies were to do that, how much good would the following types of explanations do?

1887 50C PR65 Too many hairlines for a higher grade
1910 5c MS65 Luster isn’t vibrant enough for a higher grade
1904 S$ MS66 Too many small marks for a higher grade

If you don’t feel that the above would be sufficiently helpful, what would you like to see, instead?

Mark,

Could there be some scale (H/M/L) or numeric representation (1 - X) for the 4 grading considerations. Lets say a 5 was the top score and the coin was MS.
Luster - 5
Eye Appeal - 3 ( some blotchy toning)
Strike - 3 (O mint mark)
Wear/Bagginess - 4
Other ?

Let's say the above coin grade = MS 65 or however the TPGs arrive at the grade. I may be considering an MS65 to buy & appreciate luster more so than strike & a few more bag marks. I could now separate the coin grade from an MS 65 with less marks, better strike but subdued luster. I know you can determine these on your own if you can view in hand, but that is sometimes not possible.

Sure, there could be, but I think it would be time consuming and costly. And I suspect that there would still be pretty much the same differences of opinion, second guessing, inconsistencies, etc.

It might even be more confusing and prone to arguments.

Suppose I have a 65 that is a 3/3/4/4 and you have a 64 that is 3/3/4/4. Or how do I parse two 65s where one is 2/2/4/5 and the other is 3/3/4/4?

Would people start resubmitting to get the same grade with a better set of numbers?

fathom

I would not pay extra for that service.

Though I do pay extra for CAC

ricko

Looks like we need a grading system with each grade broken down into ten parts, and each part having an additional five segments - so literally a 3500 point system. Coin grading is based on published criteria (https://www.pcgs.com/whatiscoingrading) at our hosts site. While we do not have standards, trained individuals do give their opinion (which is also reviewed) of the coins general condition - which results in a numeric assignment. The system is the best we have at this time, and generally considered accurate. Sure, there is room for discussion, since it is assigned without finite, measurable standards. However, adding even more non-measurable criteria would just expand the opportunity for discussion and disagreement. Learn to grade, use the available information and grading examples. There is a great deal of training and training aides available. Have fun, it is a hobby. Cheers, RickO

coastaljerseyguy

Let's table the question of whether anybody would pay for such a service.

I'm also an avid collector of baseball autographs and probably have 50+ PSA authenticated autographs. Now the signature could be poor and haphazardly written, the ink very light or bleeding into the ball, and written in a poor spot. But I also have the PSA enhanced service authentication where they just don't authenticate the signer, but detail grade the autograph. This service costs more, but markets easier and sell for more. You don't get it for a journeyman player, but if you have a great Jeter or Mariano Riveria autograph, it's worth it.

Regarding the proprietary formula for arriving at the final grade, that is up to the TPAs. Assuming every grade consideration is not of equal weight. But it give me more transparency of those components.

Crypto

All that is on there…. It’s called the grade. For the people who can’t decipher the outcome vs the look of the coin, an explanation wouldn’t really help.

MFeld

@coastaljerseyguy said:
Let's table the question of whether anybody would pay for such a service.

I'm also an avid collector of baseball autographs and probably have 50+ PSA authenticated autographs. Now the signature could be poor and haphazardly written, the ink very light or bleeding into the ball, and written in a poor spot. But I also have the PSA enhanced service authentication where they just don't authenticate the signer, but detail grade the autograph. This service costs more, but markets easier and sell for more. You don't get it for a journeyman player, but if you have a great Jeter or Mariano Riveria autograph, it's worth it.

Regarding the proprietary formula for arriving at the final grade, that is up to the TPAs. Assuming every grade consideration is not of equal weight. But it give me more transparency of those components.

What are the approximate cost and turnaround times?

coastaljerseyguy

Mark,

The autograph fee model is completely different than coins. You first pay the flat fee based on who is being authenticated & what. Jeter is ~ $35 while Micky Mantle is $100 and Babe Ruth is $300. But I believe the LOA upgrade detailing the condition and grade is only a $15 upgrade. Not sure how much time the letter adds to the turnaround.

My grading scenario above is not based on helping train me on how the grade was derived, it is to help me make a decision ** before** making a purchase. Internet buying will only increase and how I have bot 99% of my coins. Having this info adds to just a grade # and seller photos.

MFeld

@coastaljerseyguy said:
Mark,

The autograph fee model is completely different than coins. You first pay the flat fee based on who is being authenticated & what. Jeter is ~ $35 while Micky Mantle is $100 and Babe Ruth is $300. But I believe the LOA upgrade detailing the condition and grade is only a $15 upgrade. Not sure how much time the letter adds to the turnaround.

My grading scenario above is not based on helping train me on how the grade was derived, it is to help me make a decision ** before** making a purchase. Internet buying will only increase and how I have bot 99% of my coins. Having this info adds to just a grade # and seller photos.

Thanks very much. While I don’t see it happening, I can certainly understand why you and many other collectors would like it.

coinbuf

Very simple accountability, if the services did that it would make them accountable and open up a huge can of worms including the possibility of litigation.

BStrauss3

It's been done - in addition to the ANACS PhotoCert upstream, INSAB sent back a full page sheet with the coin evaluated on 18 categories. It didn't catch on.

You hear the fights over just one grade today, imagine 18! (18 factorial) arguments.

MFeld

@coinbuf said:
Very simple accountability, if the services did that it would make them accountable and open up a huge can of worms including the possibility of litigation.

Why would that make the grading services anymore accountable or subject to litigation than they are presently? They’d still be providing an opinion, as they do now.