How much does toning effect Grades?
djm
Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭✭✭
I have a 1903-0 Morgan Dollar PCGS graded MS-66 with the old green insert. I was thinking about sending it in for a MS-67. The coin is heavily toned with the dark blue tonning. I really believe that there is a 67 coin under the toning. How much will the toning hurt the upgrade effort on this coin.
0
Comments
Ken
This brings up a tremendously important issue:
A grading company's business is grading coins, objectively, hopefully with basis in a rigid, time-tested set of standards.
HOW CAN THEY add (or subtract) a grade, due to toning, if they subjectively determine the toning is "nice" or "not nice"?
Adding (or subtracting) a grade due to the incredibly subjective, standardless personal opinion(s) of a coin's toning is wrong, and not a part of coin "GRADING".
It is clearly only coin "PRICING".
A collector's subjective opinion of a coin's toning is clearly (and should be) fanciful, abstract, individual, personal, and intuitively prejudiced, thus effecting price, or value.
The grading companies' objectives should be to grade a coin on technical merits, based in neutrality, indifference, detachment, dispassion, open-mindedness, without prejudice.
A coin should enjoy a price that is determined by the market, not an ostensibly objective grading company.
This "plus/minus an extra point for toning" stuff is silly, to say the least!
To say the most, it completely obliterates any respect given for a grading service's assigned grade to any coin.
imho.
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
Also, toning shouldn't play a role in GRADE, just PRICE.
Since he has left I might just try to cross my NGC 1956 dime w/ heavy blue rim toning to see if anything has changed
Where does that put the arguement of toning/grade?
I'm not so sure I would crack your coin out and send it in. With the amount of complaints I see here about AT, who knows it may come back in a body bag.
Tony
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
" A grading company's business is grading coins, objectively, hopefully with basis in a rigid, time-tested set of standards. HOW CAN THEY add (or subtract) a grade, due to toning, if they subjectively determine the toning is "nice" or "not nice"? Adding (or subtracting) a grade due to the incredibly subjective, standardless personal opinion(s) of a coin's toning is wrong, and not a part of coin "GRADING"
I respectfully disagree. Eye-appeal is one of the main components of, if not THE most important consideration in grading. And toning or color is part of eye appeal.
You sound as if you want grading to be purely technical and completely objective. I'm not saying that your view is incorrect, but, that is not reality and never will be.
For each person who is unhappy that a coin is given an extra point for great color or eye-appeal, there is someone else who is upset when a dark and unattractive piece is graded on a purely technical basis and the grade seems too high. There is no way to please everyone, whether the grading standards are purely technical or not.
I guess that is why a coin recognized 12-15 years ago as a solid 6 is now in an 8 holder.
Unfortunately, the changing perception of "eye-appeal" and the current emphasis on toning renders the "standard" obsolete.
I hate being in the majority!
I must agree with you that perceptions and standards change over time. That is a fact of life that we all must live. It is also a good reason why people should buy what THEY like, not what someone else tells them they should like.
By the way, there are a number of coins that would grade lower (rather than higher) today, than they did 10 years ago, due to those changing/subjective standards and perceptions.
<< <i>By the way, there are a number of coins that would grade lower (rather than higher) today, than they did 10 years ago, due to those
changing/subjective standards and perceptions. >>
I would guess that these would be coins like mark free brilliant white 8s that, w/o toning would be in 7 holders today.
Change is acceptable, but this just doesn't make any sense to me.
What you were told may be a valid principle, but take a gander at a real "drool" coin -- that '42-P Jefferson in PR69 posted on R&I's site. That is a very toned coin, IMHO, with gorgeous rainbow rim toning (and Rick told me the the entire coin was indeed very colorful). The toning didn't hurt that coin at all (and probably shouldn't have, although the surfaces are a little difficult to assess from a smaller image on a website).
I agree that toning is more of a matter of price than technical grade. I think (or at least, hope) that barring heavy dull toning that obscured the surfaces -- which would not encourage giving a coin the "benefit of the doubt" -- an unmarred, fully-struck coin with substantial visible remaining additional luster will not be docked for having a little color, too.
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
I will attach a scan of my Roosey that leads me to believe heavy toning might limit the grade. I tried this as a cross over and may just try again. The toning is very thick on teh reverse rim. This is the coin I asked Rick M. about, but I'm not sure if he saw the coin or scan.
Forsooth.
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
"I would guess that these would be coins like mark free brilliant white 8s that, w/o toning would be in 7 holders today.
Change is acceptable, but this just doesn't make any sense to me."
I don't think you are stating this accurately. Eye appeal comprises a more significant component of grading today than it did when PCGS started out. That includes both positive and negative eye appeal. A blast white perfect coin that was graded 68 in 1986 will most likely receive that same grade today. Conversely, a coin with unattractive toning that is otherwise perfect may very well have received a grade of 68 back in 1986, but today would have little chance of grading likewise.
Stick around.
There is no answer like one from THE expert. Thanks,
Steve
Being a somewhat older collector I have a real problem with this also. How will the older collectors ever be convinced these 66 or higher coins are what they are said to be ? Maybe they will not and will just fade away and the newer generation of collectors will have thier standards and the cycle will start over again with them. Isn't this how it has been going in the Hobby since it started ?
Ken
IMHO, if a mark is distracting in any way, and makes one "re-think" the assigned grade, the coin doesn't deserve the "benefit of the doubt", "the nod".
What did the graders miss "back then", when they gave a coin (now an ms68) the lofty ms66 grade?
Maybe it's like gymnastics where they now have to re-evaluate the standards, because of past "grade-flation" where at least 9.9 was given to each participant just for their "great toning".
after I touted your fine efforts in my comments here: see my post concerning Dave's 25th place Commem set...
Do you think that any of the new 8s that used to be 6s, will someday be some other grade (7, 6, 5, 9?), if resubmitted?
Why does the kind of toning I like (light over all, or colorful rim toning), less times meets the "new?" standards of "eye appeal", and the "monster", "wwf-type" toning more often does?
Here is a summary (let me know if I missed something):
1. Steve knows his Commems as well as anyone out there. I recently watched him upgrade (2) very special coins to MS68 after submitting them unsuccessfully and then not giving up on them (special thanks to David Hall in that respect as well). Steve gives "contact marks" a large significance in his grading standards - where contact marks are covered by pretty color, Steve does not believe the grade should be inflated (perhaps the price might, but not the raw grade).
2. Dave Schweitz is one of the finest coin graders in the biz today. He constantly defies the odds, puts his money where his mouth is, and achieves the highest grades on coins anyone can imagine. Like when he bought a 1939(d) Ark in an NGC-MS66 holder at auction for the unheard of price around $17k (check sheet price on it), upgraded it to PCGS-MS68 (only one for the entire Ark type) and is currently not even entertaining offers on the coin at any price. Or, when he bought an NGC-MS66 Cleveland for around $12,000 at auction (sheet is around $400 as I recall) and upgraded it to PCGS-MS68 with a prior asking price of around $50,000 before the coin was pulled off the market to be included in the "color" Commem set Dave is building. Perhaps Dave can bring the color Comems to Long Beach and display them at his table for all to enjoy
The bottom line here is Dave operates on the assumption that wonderfully colorful coins with relatively clean surfaces will achieve mega grades and a tiny mark or two will be forgiven by the grading companies on any given grading day. This philosophy has proven correct on numerous occasions, as witnessed by the coins he has slabbed at PCGS in the mega grades.
If Steve was running the grading services, perhaps a few of these mega-grade coins would go down a grade as Steve would focus on the "marks". If Dave was running the grading services, perhaps a few more "monster color" coins would achieve the mega-grade status irrespective of the "marks". No one is right here and no one is wrong - it is all about grading philosophy and why no two people see the same coin in a slab the same way. Both Steve and Dave has done quite fine with their own personal grading philosophies
Pat. I'm not so sure that it isn't the other way around.
My whole Ark set is only worth about 2x Dave's one Ark.
I'd have to sell my Cleveland, and couple of other coins just to be able to touch his Cleveland. Lex. in P7, St. Mtn. in P8...I could go on...
Dave's "philosophy" so far, is "right on the money."
We could only wish to have such an "eye".
Nick Cascio
Sincerely,
Steve