Options
What about a 700(R)(C) point grading system? Looks like PCGS DID EXACTLY THIS with a grade modifier
oreville
Posts: 12,311 ✭✭✭✭✭
OK go ahead and flame away.
A 70 point grading system is more convertible to a 700(R)(C) point grading system than a 100 point grading system.
It allows up to 100 grades between 600(R)(C) mint state and 700(R)(C) perfection.
Of course, many of the grades in between would not have to be used until the need for it arises.
It allows the older slabs to still be relevant as the old slab grades can easily be recognized and accepted. A MS-65 would be understood as a MS-650.
Since I have thought of this first, I claim all (R)and (C) rights to such a grading scale. I have also published this elsewhere as well.
Looks like PCGS has now created a three digit sized grading system with the addition of a third digit as a grade modifier.
Think 70 point grading system with a third digit. Even a decimal point grading system with or without the decimal point will be a form of a 700 point grading system.
A 70 point grading system is more convertible to a 700(R)(C) point grading system than a 100 point grading system.
It allows up to 100 grades between 600(R)(C) mint state and 700(R)(C) perfection.
Of course, many of the grades in between would not have to be used until the need for it arises.
It allows the older slabs to still be relevant as the old slab grades can easily be recognized and accepted. A MS-65 would be understood as a MS-650.
Since I have thought of this first, I claim all (R)and (C) rights to such a grading scale. I have also published this elsewhere as well.
Looks like PCGS has now created a three digit sized grading system with the addition of a third digit as a grade modifier.
Think 70 point grading system with a third digit. Even a decimal point grading system with or without the decimal point will be a form of a 700 point grading system.
A Collectors Universe poster since 1997!
0
Comments
<< <i>OK go ahead and flame away.
A 70 point grading system is more convertible to a 700(R)(C) point grading system than a 100 point grading system.
It allows up to 100 grades between 600(R)(C) mint state and 700(R)(C) perfection.
Of course, many of the grades in between would not have to be used until the need for it arises.
It allows the older slabs to still be relevant as the old slab grades can easily be recognized and accepted. A MS-65 would be understood as a MS-650.
Since I have thought of this first, I claim all (R)and (C) rights to such a grading scale. I have also published this elsewhere as well. >>
seems a number of folks are having a slow day at the office today...
heck, I have some nerve talking... I've got the time to read this stuff...
BTW... what does the (R) and (C) stand for?
(C) usually with a circle around it is copyright.
Since I am sometimes confused between the two myself, I put down both.
Of course, I hope it never gets used but if it ever does, I might as well as be the one that discovered it first.
I find the current grading scale ok and easy enough to figure out for a newbi. If we change it though, I hope its something easy to understand for a newcomer. When and if my loved ones ever need to sell them and Im not around, I want it to be as simple as possible for them.
© Alt 0169
But I am still wondering where the 5,7,9,11,13,14,16,17,18,19,21,22,23,24,26,27,28,29,31,32,33,34,36,37,38,39,41,42,,43,44,46,47,48,49,51,52,54,56,57,& 59 went.
Seems like we allready have more numbers that we don't use, than ones we use.
Wait! I have an equally retarded idea! Why don't we just have a giant condition census comprising the entire mintage of a specific coin? That way, there would never be any confusion about which coin is actually better. Instead of grades, we would have 1, 2, 3, all the way down to 72 million.
Obviously you guys are worried too much that we need more regulation, which is supposed to do what? Ensure that everybody agrees on a grade, or a coin's worthiness? Coin grading is subjective. That means inherently that people are supposed to disagree. DUH! That's one of the wonderful things that makes this a great hobby.
Rant over.
Empty Nest Collection
Why not a 714 system so we can link it to Babe Ruth's home run total? Then we can bring in baseball fans as well. Those last 14 points can be kept in the on-deck-circle for that rainy day when a grade of "better-than-perfection" is required to separate the very best coins from 700. At one point per year gradeflation than can give 14 additional years. Or we can just use Hank Aaron's total of 755 that will ensure plenty of available higher grades for decades to come.
roadrunner
'Damn the torpedoes Full speed ahead'
<< <i>If one of the 2 major TPG's goes forward with anything along these lines then my collection goes 100% raw that same day.
'Damn the torpedoes Full speed ahead' >>
what he said
<< <i>Another retarded idea. Let's just take the fun out of collecting and grading by whittling a coin's merits down to a tiny point on a huge scale. No more, "hey, this 65 is better than that one". Just read the number, it tells all. BUT WAIT! Here's two MS-654's. Which one do you like better? Oh! but they would HAVE to be the same. How could you possibly like one more than the other?
Wait! I have an equally retarded idea! Why don't we just have a giant condition census comprising the entire mintage of a specific coin? That way, there would never be any confusion about which coin is actually better. Instead of grades, we would have 1, 2, 3, all the way down to 72 million.
Obviously you guys are worried too much that we need more regulation, which is supposed to do what? Ensure that everybody agrees on a grade, or a coin's worthiness? Coin grading is subjective. That means inherently that people are supposed to disagree. DUH! That's one of the wonderful things that makes this a great hobby.
Rant over. >>
However, your use of the word "retarded" is not one of the "wonderful things" and is very demeaning to people who suffer from this developmental disability. So what is next? Racial slurs, degrading ethnic or gender references? Perhaps it would benefit you to volunteer to work with people who have developmental disabilities and you could understand the hurt such remarks can cause.
Larry L.
I like it! We know that "Home Run" Hall is a big baseball fan.
<< <i>However, your use of the word "retarded" is not one of the "wonderful things" and is very demeaning to people who suffer from this developmental disability. So what is next? Racial slurs, degrading ethnic or gender references? Perhaps it would benefit you to volunteer to work with people who have developmental disabilities and you could understand the hurt such remarks can cause. >>
LOL - you guys crack me up
<< <i>
<< <i>However, your use of the word "retarded" is not one of the "wonderful things" and is very demeaning to people who suffer from this developmental disability. So what is next? Racial slurs, degrading ethnic or gender references? Perhaps it would benefit you to volunteer to work with people who have developmental disabilities and you could understand the hurt such remarks can cause. >>
LOL - you guys crack me up
I suppose it is a laughing matter until one day when you or yours are affected personally. At that point I guarantee the humor will cease. I am certain that the writer has a better command of the English language to avoid such remarks.
And, by the way, the 700 point system is not a realistic option.
Larry L.
<< <i>
<< <i>Another retarded idea. Let's just take the fun out of collecting and grading by whittling a coin's merits down to a tiny point on a huge scale. No more, "hey, this 65 is better than that one". Just read the number, it tells all. BUT WAIT! Here's two MS-654's. Which one do you like better? Oh! but they would HAVE to be the same. How could you possibly like one more than the other?
Wait! I have an equally retarded idea! Why don't we just have a giant condition census comprising the entire mintage of a specific coin? That way, there would never be any confusion about which coin is actually better. Instead of grades, we would have 1, 2, 3, all the way down to 72 million.
Obviously you guys are worried too much that we need more regulation, which is supposed to do what? Ensure that everybody agrees on a grade, or a coin's worthiness? Coin grading is subjective. That means inherently that people are supposed to disagree. DUH! That's one of the wonderful things that makes this a great hobby.
Rant over. >>
However, your use of the word "retarded" is not one of the "wonderful things" and is very demeaning to people who suffer from this developmental disability. So what is next? Racial slurs, degrading ethnic or gender references? Perhaps it would benefit you to volunteer to work with people who have developmental disabilities and you could understand the hurt such remarks can cause.
Larry L.
Straight from Webster's New World Dictionary...
re-tard'/ed adj. slowed or delayed in development, esp. mentally...
I do believe the person who posted this word did, in fact, use it correctly. While it may have a negative connotation for some... that does not change the meaning of the word. Regardless of the word(s) one uses to try to somehow sterilize an unfortunate situation, it in no way changes the nature of said situation.
For the record... this comes from a person who has worked with emotionally and developmentally "challenged" children (is that how we are supposed to "clean up" an otherwise unfortunate situation?)
edited to add...
Making direct "fun" of people who suffer is never acceptable... however, using a word in the dictionary is acceptable, if used appropriately... while I may or may not agree with the sentiments of the post, I was not offended by the use of "that" word. Could he have found another way to express himself? Perhaps...
What about a 700(R)(C) point grading system? Looks like PCGS is get ready to do exactly this with a grade modifier!
<< <i>As the father of an autistic daughter who is non-verbal, I would be pleased to see us get back to the topic I originally posted.
What about a 700(R)(C) point grading system? Looks like PCGS is get ready to do exactly this with a grade modifier! >>
My apologies...
As for the topic... I certainly hope you are wrong... I will quickly absolve myself of all slabbed material if this should come to pass...
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
Now the big question is: Which forum member will be the first to report it, sitting at the meeting and typing it in their laptop or other device as the words are leaving HRH's mouth?
Larry L.
<< <i>I think it's far, far, far more likely (and that's putting it mildly)
It's about time! NGC did it, then CAC came in and did it for PCGS coins. My question is, what took PCGS so long to catch up with everyone else???
<< <i>
<< <i>I think it's far, far, far more likely (and that's putting it mildly)
It's about time! NGC did it, then CAC came in and did it for PCGS coins. My question is, what took PCGS so long to catch up with everyone else??? >>
NGC's star designation is not a modifier with respect to quality. It pertains to eye-appeal, not the technical grade of the coin. And it is as likely to be used on a low end coin as on a high end coin.
you have got to be kidding.
Send the major TPG's the same CBH grading AU53 five times and see the results.
Then tell me they can differentiate between a 53.3 and a 53.4
<< <i>It's about time! NGC did it, then CAC came in and did it for PCGS coins. My question is, what took PCGS so long to catch up with everyone else??? >>
Perhaps they are striving to do it better? Perhaps it is just a part of a much bigger plan and not a "stand-alone"? Perhaps their goal was not to "catch up" but to surpass? Perhaps they don't intend to compete , but rather excel with a first class act? We'll all find out on the 25th!
Larry L.
PCGS hopes that you have a rightful claim "to such a grading scale." Otherwise, the license that you granted to PCGS might not be enforceable.
License to Use Posted Materials:
Subject to the Posting Rules set forth below, by submitting messages, information, data, text, files, links, artwork, photographs, software, or other materials ("Materials") to any of these Forums, you automatically grant (or warrant that the owner of such Materials has expressly granted) us the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, worldwide right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, take excerpts from, incorporate into other works, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such Materials (in whole or part), in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed.
I guess I don't get the sentiment about cracking-out one's collection if it comes to be. What's the point? Private rebellion?
Matt's sarcastic proposal for a giant condition census for each specific coin is a great idea! Especially if the census is managed like a registry, where a newly graded coin comes along and pushes everyone below it down one spot. Ha. Now you have a fine reason to dislike the new guy.
A single PQ indicator isn't a bad idea. But why stop there? Maybe a few special indicators: low, middle, high for the grade? Better yet, 10 different ones and just number them?
Lance.
Expanding a scale by increasing the scale in a non-linear fashion (i.e. 70 to 100) will add turmoil to the entire coin world. This has been discussed repeatedly on this forum.
Creating a scale that is expanded but easily equatable to the existing scales is much easier to cope with ( 70 scale to 1.1-70.0 or 1 to 700) is workable but too fine an accuracy line for graders to manage with precision. Time is money, graders do not have the time to assign fractions accurately and precision will falter. In addition, we are already expressed angst when a coin submitted with a hope of being a 64RB comes back 63BN. The subjectivity of grading is difficult and coins are resubmitted multiple times to attain the elusive next score. Now in the proposed new scale we will be asking the graders to grade a coin 63.8 and not 63.6. I would opt for no change or a scale of relative goodness (i.e. 63; 63+; 63++. Note negatives are avoided although a -;0;+ is more logical . Giving a minus is not good marketing.
If PCGS is truly going to add a grade modifier and effectively increase the number of grades in the scale, I hope they will be smart enough to do a trial run in house, to see if graders can actually deliver the intended precision. And if the trial run does not take place, and the service is introduced, and the graders don't meet the challenge, you can expect all hell to break loose. Mark my words.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>If PCGS is truly going to add a grade modifier and effectively increase the number of grades in the scale, I hope they will be smart enough to do a trial run in house, to see if graders can actually deliver the intended precision. And if the trial run does not take place, and the service is introduced, and the graders don't meet the challenge, you can expect all hell to break loose. Mark my words. >>
In other words, contrary to this thread's title, PCGS wont be using a 700 point grading scale, after all.
this is about 1925-S Dollars in MS64.5 and 1911-D quarter eagles in MS63.5. and it may involve such coins as 1797 half dollars in grades like Fine-18. that's my guess.. for an extra fee, they'll use all the whole numbers for circ grades, and to one decimal place for MS grades. The customer will decide if they want to apply for the fee (If the coin's worth it)
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Your old firm Pinnacle Rarities said the following:
<< <i>......The Plus part is that coins will now be graded on a 700 point scale rather than a 70 point scale. (The grade on the holder will remain on the 70 point scale.) Those coins receiving a 7, 8 or 9 at the end will garner the new Plus designation. It is estimated that the top 10-15% of coins in their respective grade will receive the " +." >>
Hoard the keys.
Good luck with your name rights.
<< <i>Personally, I think it's a dumb idea. A 700 point grading system would probably send folks across the street, me included. >>
You will find the same thing across the street as they also have just started the + but they also have the *.
So NGC actually now has a 7000 point system. Perhaps you will like that more.