A modest proposal (or how to survive a change to 100pt grading)
cladking
Posts: 28,702 ✭✭✭✭✭
OK, there's no need to eat the young but there's also no need to muck up the existing
grading system or the grading gaurantees on the way to another system.
One simple solution would be to continue with the 11 grades of unc with the new system
so you'd just add thirty points to the existing grade to get the new grade. This would ac-
complish very little and would still leave great price disparity between grades. The scale
could be expanded to 21 points of unc in the 100pt system. All existing grades would be
given the benefit of the doubt so MS-60 becomes MS-81 where MS-80 is the lowest grade
of unc. 61 becomes 83, 62/ 85, 63/ 87, 64/ 89 etc. This would have the effect of allowing
finer levels of grading which could help improve consistency (though create more liners).
It would also help reduce the TPG's exposure to grading gaurantees. Some resubmitted
coins would come back one grade higher. Such coins would tend to offset losses not cov-
ered by the gaurantee especially for those who select their coins carefully or according to
market standards.
Many are strongly opposed to the criteria based grading as has been suggested in some of
the threads on this subject. It seems it is especially the classic collectors and some of the
arguments are understandable. This grading would be more suitable to the grading of mod-
erns anyway since there is much less variability with surface characteristics usually. So how
do you feel about using two different systems, one for pre-'65 issues and one for '65 and later?
title change
grading system or the grading gaurantees on the way to another system.
One simple solution would be to continue with the 11 grades of unc with the new system
so you'd just add thirty points to the existing grade to get the new grade. This would ac-
complish very little and would still leave great price disparity between grades. The scale
could be expanded to 21 points of unc in the 100pt system. All existing grades would be
given the benefit of the doubt so MS-60 becomes MS-81 where MS-80 is the lowest grade
of unc. 61 becomes 83, 62/ 85, 63/ 87, 64/ 89 etc. This would have the effect of allowing
finer levels of grading which could help improve consistency (though create more liners).
It would also help reduce the TPG's exposure to grading gaurantees. Some resubmitted
coins would come back one grade higher. Such coins would tend to offset losses not cov-
ered by the gaurantee especially for those who select their coins carefully or according to
market standards.
Many are strongly opposed to the criteria based grading as has been suggested in some of
the threads on this subject. It seems it is especially the classic collectors and some of the
arguments are understandable. This grading would be more suitable to the grading of mod-
erns anyway since there is much less variability with surface characteristics usually. So how
do you feel about using two different systems, one for pre-'65 issues and one for '65 and later?
title change
Tempus fugit.
0
Comments
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>PCGS will not be switching to a 100 point scale. >>
Why is it that 100pt grading, which is simply the topic for discussion in an upcoming show, is now suddenly assumed by everyone as gospel???
<< <i>PCGS will not be switching to a 100 point scale.
Russ, NCNE >>
I think I've read this before, several times.
as in, FGI, as it is, I repeat, A NON-ISSUE!
RR
Would you let everyone know that, so all of the 100 point threads will go away?
Hardly an hour two goes by without someone starting one.
<< <i>OK, there's no need to eat the young but there's also no need to muck up the existing
grading system or the grading gaurantees on the way to another system.
One simple solution would be to continue with the 11 grades of unc with the new system
so you'd just add thirty points to the existing grade to get the new grade. This would ac-
complish very little and would still leave great price disparity between grades. The scale
could be expanded to 21 points of unc in the 100pt system. All existing grades would be
given the benefit of the doubt so MS-60 becomes MS-81 where MS-80 is the lowest grade
of unc. 61 becomes 83, 62/ 85, 63/ 87, 64/ 89 etc. This would have the effect of allowing
finer levels of grading which could help improve consistency (though create more liners).
It would also help reduce the TPG's exposure to grading gaurantees. Some resubmitted
coins would come back one grade higher. Such coins would tend to offset losses not cov-
ered by the gaurantee especially for those who select their coins carefully or according to
market standards.
Many are strongly opposed to the criteria based grading as has been suggested in some of
the threads on this subject. It seems it is especially the classic collectors and some of the
arguments are understandable. This grading would be more suitable to the grading of mod-
erns anyway since there is much less variability with surface characteristics usually. So how
do you feel about using two different systems, one for pre-'65 issues and one for '65 and later? >>
I don't think all the numbers could be used! For instance, prime numbers would have to go. Who would ever want a MS79 grade on a coin? So the following numbers are what I believe would be more workable
and accepted if a move to a 100 pint grading system would ever materialize.
MS72
MS74
MS75
MS76
MS78
MS80
MS81
MS82
MS84
MS85
MS86
MS88
MS90
MS92
MS94
MS95
MS96
MS98
MS99
MS100
Man! Doesn't that MS100 turn anybody on?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I like having a bit different scale when it comes to grading.....
The 100 point scale is bad, bad idea, and I wish that it would go away.
<< <i>
<< <i>OK, there's no need to eat the young but there's also no need to muck up the existing
grading system or the grading gaurantees on the way to another system.
One simple solution would be to continue with the 11 grades of unc with the new system
so you'd just add thirty points to the existing grade to get the new grade. This would ac-
complish very little and would still leave great price disparity between grades. The scale
could be expanded to 21 points of unc in the 100pt system. All existing grades would be
given the benefit of the doubt so MS-60 becomes MS-81 where MS-80 is the lowest grade
of unc. 61 becomes 83, 62/ 85, 63/ 87, 64/ 89 etc. This would have the effect of allowing
finer levels of grading which could help improve consistency (though create more liners).
It would also help reduce the TPG's exposure to grading gaurantees. Some resubmitted
coins would come back one grade higher. Such coins would tend to offset losses not cov-
ered by the gaurantee especially for those who select their coins carefully or according to
market standards.
Many are strongly opposed to the criteria based grading as has been suggested in some of
the threads on this subject. It seems it is especially the classic collectors and some of the
arguments are understandable. This grading would be more suitable to the grading of mod-
erns anyway since there is much less variability with surface characteristics usually. So how
do you feel about using two different systems, one for pre-'65 issues and one for '65 and later? >>
I don't think all the numbers could be used! For instance, prime numbers would have to go. Who would ever want a MS79 grade on a coin? So the following numbers are what I believe would be more workable
and accepted if a move to a 100 pint grading system would ever materialize.
MS72
MS74
MS75
MS76
MS78
MS80
MS81
MS82
MS84
MS85
MS86
MS88
MS90
MS92
MS94
MS95
MS96
MS98
MS99
MS100
Man! Doesn't that MS100 turn anybody on?
Leo
Let me redefine the new grading system in the time I have before I make my run for some more smokes!
I left out the MS60 to MS70 grades and some of them would serve no real purpose in the new 100 point grading system. MS61 and 62, 64 (never did like that number anyway), 66, 68, 69 and 70, out the door they all go! Especially MS70! Yuk......yuk....yuk.....hate that number, get rid of it, it's gone!
So what we have left are the following numbers;
MS60 & MS63 Brilliant Uncirculated BU
MS65 & MS67 Choice Uncirculated CU
MS68 & MS72 Gem Uncirculated GU
MS75 & MS78 Choice Superb Uncirculated CSU
MS80 & MS84 Superb Uncirculated SU
MS87 & MS92 Superb Toned Uncirculated STU
MS95 & MS98 Near Perfect Uncirculated NPU
MS100............Perfect Uncirculated PU
Leo
Hense the separation of market grading verse technical grading! The lower or upper numbers for each superlative grade level could be used for one or the other. It doesn't matter to me as long as I know which is which!
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I propose the only alpha grade designators should be circ and unc. The current scheme should remain unchanged for circ, except it should be extended to 65. Unc should range 60 to 100, and be a variant of the A thru F scale used in school, with 60 being horrible unc and 100 being perfect. A grade A unc would be in the 93 to 100 range, etc. Leaves plenty of room, is easy to understand, and simple to teach.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor