Five true/false statements on human nature and submitting

gyocomgd

Five statements designed to elicit theories and discussion. Answer true/false, and chat away on any if so inclined.
My personal feelings: All five statements are "True" to some degree.

1. The grading room has good/bad days.
Even with several graders looking at the same coin, there will be days when they are a bit more conservative or relaxed than others.

2. The first grader is by far the most influential.
If the first grader sees a coin as MS64 but very PQ , the second and third graders will affirm that grade even though they each would have squeaked it to 65 had they seen it first.

3. Great coins can "carry" a so-so coin to a higher grade than it might receive otherwise.
If you submit three terrific coins and a fourth that is slightly less impressive than the first three, the quality of the first three may help the slider fourth to a better grade than it would receive if submitted by itself.

4. Coins would be graded more accurately if the time devoted to a given coin--10 seconds or so on average--were increased by 5 seconds.
The tremendous number of coins that pass through the grading room in general results in less-than-adequate attention to each coin.

5. Graders are less apt to cross or upgrade coins submitted in a chief rival's holder.
The fact a coin is in a competitor's holder weighs at least subliminally in the graders' minds, and they do not look at it as objectively as if the coin were raw.

fastrudy

The SENIOR grader is the most influential

Not sure about #3

Re: #5, don't they break it out of the first slab in a different room and then hand it to the graders? The graders just see a coin and not the prior slab, or am I naive?

Longacre

1. True
2. False
3. False
4. True
5. False


Each one might be true to some degree, but I will stick with my answers if I had to choose. I thought that second and third graders do not see the first grader's grade? I could be wrong. I might be polly-anna-ish, but I don't think that the set-up coin concept works and I think that each coin is graded independently. Also, I never bought the "rival holder" theory either. Each coin should be independently graded, no matter how it comes into the grading room.

longtimecollector

1. Obviously true, otherwise there'd be no point to the "crackout game"

2. I think only the "finalizer" sees all 3 grades

3.Not sure, but I know the concept of the "set-up" coins seems to work when 2-3 lower grade coins are submitted with one that is obviously nicer

4.Grading is mechanical, and more time most likely wouldn't make a difference

5.TRUE

Barndog

<< <i>Five statements designed to elicit theories and discussion. Answer true/false, and chat away on any if so inclined.
My personal feelings: All five statements are "True" to some degree.

1. The grading room has good/bad days.
Even with several graders looking at the same coin, there will be days when they are a bit more conservative or relaxed than others.
graders are human, graders have good and bad days, agreed. However, the process used (multiple graders/finalizers/etc) should help to "smooth out" the individuals' good and bad days

2. The first grader is by far the most influential.
If the first grader sees a coin as MS64 but very PQ , the second and third graders will affirm that grade even though they each would have squeaked it to 65 had they seen it first.
really depends on the process. If the process is for grader one to assign a grade then show the coin and grade to grader two, then you are right on the money. If "blinding" of previous graders' results is used, then the statement will be false

3. Great coins can "carry" a so-so coin to a higher grade than it might receive otherwise.
If you submit three terrific coins and a fourth that is slightly less impressive than the first three, the quality of the first three may help the slider fourth to a better grade than it would receive if submitted by itself.
I sure hope this is true, how else could someone sneak a dog past a professional?

4. Coins would be graded more accurately if the time devoted to a given coin--10 seconds or so on average--were increased by 5 seconds.
The tremendous number of coins that pass through the grading room in general results in less-than-adequate attention to each coin.
I don't think there is any doubt about it. Even an accomplished grader can and will pick up more defects or characteristics of a coin with 50% more time

5. Graders are less apt to cross or upgrade coins submitted in a chief rival's holder.
The fact a coin is in a competitor's holder weighs at least subliminally in the graders' minds, and they do not look at it as objectively as if the coin were raw.
seems like human nature to me too >>

Russ

1. True.

They are human.

2. False.

The finalizer is the most influential.

3. True.

I've experienced it.

4. Sometimes true.

Many coins don't need more time. Only a handful do.

5. True.

Besides any natural bias, the holder tends to obscure the coin.

Russ, NCNE

DrPete

Regarding other grading services' holders.

PCGS on a cross-over service submission will only take the coin out of the other holder if they grade the coin at the level specified on the submission form. That is, it must meet or exceed the PCGS standards for the grade desired.

This causes two problems that make a conservative approach the only smart way for PCGS to use, and I see no other approach that makes good business sense for them (or for you if you were in their moccasins). That means the coin must really make the necessary grade when viewed in this manner, as once it is removed, there is no going back into the old holder. The other problem would be if the coin has an edge problem or other hidden feature that isn't seen while in the holder. If either situation occurred, that is, a coin not making the grade was removed by PCGS, they have an obligation to grade the coin as requested or pay out money for their "mistake." It wouldn't take very many such mistakes to make one approach such situations very cautiously and for the bar to be set high.

This is the explanation I find useful when I read discussions of how cracking a coin out before submitting it tends to garner better overall results than sending a coin already slabbed. The cracked out coin can be directly viewed and the issues discussed above about possible hidden problems goes away for PCGS and allows the different mind-set to grading the coin. The downside to cracking out a coin is the potential the coin will come back in a lower grade than desired.

MadMarty

True
False
True
True
True

Newcomp103

<< <i>Coins would be graded more accurately if the time devoted to a given coin--10 seconds or so on average--were increased by 5 seconds.
The tremendous number of coins that pass through the grading room in general results in less-than-adequate attention to each coin. >>



I understand that the TPGs have a lot of coins to look at...but is 10 seconds really all they give a coin??? that could one of the reasons why there are so many over/under graded coins in slabs....I am just giving my opinion of course, but that seems crazy, I am just getting my eyes adjusted to seriously examine a coin after 10 seconds!

Bochiman

<< <i>True
False
True
True
True >>



All you did was copy Russ. I can see how you got through school now.....

Russ

<< <i>I understand that the TPGs have a lot of coins to look at...but is 10 seconds really all they give a coin??? >>



Very few coins require more time. I mean, how much time does it take to slap MS69 on modern bullion?

Russ, NCNE

guitarwes

Good thread there Guy.....

I'm gonna go with Longacre's answers.....although on the last one, I think that, given the guarantee they make on overgraded coins, most of the time an upgrade that is substantial, is not given. Whether it be the "rival" thing or the $$$ thing, who's to know...

pharmer

Good thread Dr Yocum

1. True that an individual grader has good/bad days, but an entire grading room?

2. True

3. True in my experience but also the other way around, two average coins will make a similar yet "better" third one get the bump.

4. True

5. Just my belief this is false, not enough crossing experience yet

TwoSides2aCoin

The only thing I know to be true is that I've never been in the grading room.


Joe

airplanenut

<< <i>
3. Great coins can "carry" a so-so coin to a higher grade than it might receive otherwise.
If you submit three terrific coins and a fourth that is slightly less impressive than the first three, the quality of the first three may help the slider fourth to a better grade than it would receive if submitted by itself. >>

Or, after seeing a solid example of a grade, the less impressive coin looks even worse, and gets the lower grade...



<< <i>4. Coins would be graded more accurately if the time devoted to a given coin--10 seconds or so on average--were increased by 5 seconds.
The tremendous number of coins that pass through the grading room in general results in less-than-adequate attention to each coin.
>>

I would disagree there. Graders are really good, and when they need to take more time, they do. The longer you look at a coin when you don't need to, the more likely you are to second guess yourself, and then be wrong. First impressions are very often good.

MrBreeze

I agree with Jeremy on #3. When I see a nice coin, it really brings out the warts on a so-so example.

BAJJERFAN

3. #3 is known in the biz as setup coins.

also you forgot #6 Ownership adds a point to the grade. Mostly true I'd say.