Interesting grading insight revisisted. Important tip for all

wingedliberty

Have you ever been enlightened to something, knowing all along that you practice it and its buried so
deep in your subconscious, that you really never think about it on a conscious level? I am talking about
evaluating strike when grading a coin. I recently spoke with several major professional graders as well
as with personal friends who used to grade for the major services. We got into a discussion about the
finer points of grading and I was told that the biggest rookie mistakes that are made, and also made
by everyone experienced ,every now and then, are mistakes and omissions when it comes to strike.
I found this difficult to believe, since I consider strike a major component of the grading equation and
because I have been grading and looking at coins for many years. and took several grading courses with
the ANA , but then something dawned on me,which I shared with my friends.

Here is what I shared with them and what they shared with me:

1.I told them that if you look at enough coins within a certain series, then you develop the same biases
that the grading services alot for. Here are examples.

1. Poor strikes on Peace dollars.
2. High expectations on DCAM proofs and certain levels of contrast expectations and levels of detail.
3. Biases for and against toning, and toning being a factor in evaluating or not evaluating strike.
4. Not factoring in strike on an otherwise average coin, to place it within a higher grade, when it
warrants.
5. Not looking at the relief on the portraits or devices and rims.
6. Being more liberal on series that you favor and collect.
7. Being dazzled by a coin that you forget about certain elements of grading.
8. Being dazzled by a coin that you forget certain factors in authenticating it.


To sum it up, it comes to this,
IT IS DIFFICULT TO BE 100% OBJECTIVE AND IMPARTIAL IN GRADING, NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY.
IT IS EVEN MORE DIFFICULT TO DO IT CONSISTENTLY AND EVALUATE ALL FACTORS ON A COIN, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE NO INTEREST IN THAT SERIES.


My conclusion after that conversation was easy.


1.Grading is a fine art
2.Being a professional grader is fun as hell!!!
3.It would be fun to try it for a day and see if what your level of penetration is with the finalizers.


What are your thoughts?


Best regards,
Brian.

kranky

I would also be puzzled that strike could be easily overlooked. Strike is as self-evident as surface marks and luster. I don't really understand why sometimes coins which typically come with weak strikes are given a break, though. To me it's like saying, "Yes, there is a big gouge across the cheek on that MS65, but they typically come mutilated."

I surely agree that grading is an art, and not only that but you have to remain current with the state of the art.

dorkkarl

grading is easily the most misunderstood & therefore abused aspect of all coin-collecting. there's no question about it. i would bet that virtually everyone you might ask thinks the "grade" of a coin is something unto itself, an independent characterstic that requires objective evaluation. nothing could be further than the truth.

grading arises out of the desire to be able to value a coin relative to other coins of the identical variety, w/out it being necessary to have all coins in the population on-hand for comparison. because it is a relative measure, it is subjective by definition, not an objectively measured characteristic of a coin. it is a crutch, a convenience, & nothing more, no matter how hard plastic companies would try to convince you otherwise.

it is why questions regarding "consistent" & "accurate" grades are in actually absurd, since a "grade" is not something inherent, something measurable, to a coin.

the reason why newbies have initial difficulty grading is NOT because they haven't learned the "fine points of grading". it is because they have not bought, sold, or priced enough coins to know what value is applicable to a general level of preservation. in other words, the VALUE of a specific coin compared to others of its ilk, that is the issue, NOT a phantom characterstic known as "grade".

i'm not trying to address any specific question, but you asked "What are your thoughts?". now, maybe you wished you hadn't asked!

K s

tradedollarnut

IMO, PCGS goes a bit far on the strike issue. It seems to me that a full and complete strike is required to reach the grade of 65. On an 11 point scale, I think there's a bit more leniency available for a bit of weak strike. They are inconsistent in how they apply this.

For instance, why can a SLQ be a 65 with a weak head, but a trade dollar cannot? Why can a trade dollar proof be a 67 with weak stars, but a MS cannot be a 65? I'm certain there are other inconsistencies between series.

I do have to admit that strike ranks below luster, toning, surface preservation and eye appeal in my mind - so perhaps I'm too forgiving?

tradedollarnut

Dorkkarl: you are beginning to make more and more sense to me - is that scary? What an excellent answer.

As values increase between grades, the nuances get more important. For instance:

I own the finest known 1873-CC trade dollar (even DH agrees it's nicer). It is an NGC MS65. I also own the second finest known - a PCGS MS64. I paid $30k more for the finest known than the second finest known - a 70% jump. And I bought the second finest from the guy I was competing against for the finest, so we both agree how they rank. But PCGS grades the coins the same grade.

Now, in my mind, there should not be a 70% range in value within the same grade. They need to be one grade apart. They are one grade apart. I just haven't gotten it accomplished yet at the same company! Does that mean I don't know how to grade?

dorkkarl

<< <i>Dorkkarl: you are beginning to make more and more sense to me >>

wait a minute... that means i wasn't making sense before???

wingedliberty, there is a crucial "error" (for lack of a better term) in your hypothesis, where you said "MORE DIFFICULT TO DO IT CONSISTENTLY AND EVALUATE ALL FACTORS ON A COIN, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE NO INTEREST IN THAT SERIES." i think the opposite is true. the more disconnected you are from a series, the more likely you are to be able to remove "tendencies" & "expectations" from the grading formula. look, if i was a fanatic about the chicago bears, live & breathed bears football, etc., it would be far more difficult for me to evaluate the team's performance than that of, say, the detroit lions (sorry detroit). i couldn't care less about the lions, so the only thing that would matter would be the pertinent record. i could objectively say "they were 1-15 this year, so they suck". on the other hand, i would say about the bears "they were 1-15 this year, but you know what, they had injuries, the played in a strange stadium all year, this guy was hurt, that guy had personal problems" & on & on.

the bottom line , though, is that, like i said before, you are trying to establish the "grade" of the coin as if it were an independent characteristic of the coin, like a serial number. it just ain't possible, friend, & it never will be. but what you CAN establish is the "threshold of pain" as i like to call it, the max. $$$ amount you would be willing to pay for a specific coin, & that IS an absolute number - at least at that point in time.

make sense?

if you want, i can continue developing my points, otherwise...

K S

wingedliberty

Nice feedback from all. Thanks. Anyone else care to share their thoughts?

Brian.

Gilbert

Well, no, but I do have a question in light of DK response.


Since I attach no monetary value to a coin when I consider the grading characteristics, nor do I make any effort to remember how much a particular grade of coin costs (until it's time to buy), does that mean I'm not grading, or can't grade, or can't use the published criteria of coin grading to describe a coin? I am well aware of independent services market grading strategies, so please don't discount my question merely because the services do employ market grading.

paigowjohnny

For my area of interest-Morgans--I consider strike of paramount importance in my determination of overall appearance and grade. Way too easy to be burned by sliders (which I have way too many times) if you don't know strike characteristics...and historically which dates have strong/average/crappy strikes.

As for this one...

<< <i>2.Being a professional grader is fun as hell!!! >>



I think I'd go psychotic after my 2000th SAE or Sacagecrappa trying to get bumped to 69 or 70...and all the Frankies and Kennedys

dorkkarl

<< <i>Since I attach no monetary value to a coin when I consider the grading characteristics, nor do I make any effort to remember how much a particular grade of coin costs (until it's time to buy), does that mean I'm not grading >>

you are indeed grading, but it is still a by-product of valuation - assuming you are attempting to stay w/in "guidelines". ie, you are not the only person to have graded a particular type of coin (safe assumption, i'd say), for example, lets say a 1909-vdb penny is your love interest of the moment. you grade it ms-63 because its unc, average luster, average nicks, etc. subconciously, you have indeed valued the coin, because before you saw this particular coin, 100's of thousands of other buyers/graders have established a market value (& by extension, a grade) for it, & you are falling w/in those guidelines (assuming you're rational)

alternative perspective: assume there's a "blast-white" coin "accurately" graded by pcgs as ms-65. but suppose you just happen to despise blast-white. YOU grade it ms-63. that PROVES that "grades" are not an independent characterstic of coins. to YOU, the coin is worth $50, whereas the redbook indicates $290.

another way to look at it. assume this same ms-65 coin is of a series you particularly despise, say ike's. the coin books at $100, but you'd pay nothing more than a dollar for it. the point is that no matter what it "grades", no matter how magnanamous the slabed grade is, YOU grade it as "xf", because you value it at only a dollar.

making sense yet?

K S