PCGS Grading Challenge at FUN
messydesk
Posts: 20,309 ✭✭✭✭✭
36 people took part in PCGS's grading challenge at FUN. They had a single box of 20 coins, and one person at a time could take up to 20 minutes to do an in-hand GTG. No coins were problem coins, no coins were fakes, and a few could be plus-graded. The subject coins were almost all uncirculated or AU. There was (if memory serves me well) a $5 Indian, a $5 Liberty, two $10 Indians, two $20 Libs, two $20 Saints, one Indian cent, I think a Lincoln cent, a buffalo nickel, a proof Barber dime, a Roosevelt dime, a Standing Liberty quarter, a Washington quarter, 3 or 4 Morgan dollars, maybe a Peace dollar, and I guess I'm forgetting a couple. All coins were uncirculated or AU except for the Standing Liberty quarter, which was a 1926 F15. Collectors of circulated seated and earlier stuff would have been displeased, as would have been those that spent a lot of time reviewing hair-splitting 19th century grade transitions in their hotel room late Friday night. The inclusion of that quarter I'm assuming came with HRH saying, "this will be the one the most people screw up because nobody that plays has probably graded any low-grade circulated type 3 SLQs since they were 12," or something like that. I laughed a little when I saw that coin, then proceeded to miss the grade, as likely predicted.
I went through the box in less than 10 minutes (the actual time was probably logged on my scoresheet). I didn't want to spend lots of time on any given coin. The winner got 8 out of 20 matches and the lowest deviations from the actual grades among the three players that got 8 right. I managed to get 3 matches, and had I remembered to call the proof Barber dime a cameo, I'd have had 4. I picked 3 or 4 coins to assign a + grade to, but I picked the wrong ones. I graded an AU61 gold coin as 58 instead of 61 (or vice versa). I think the one I missed by the most (2 full steps) was the circ. SLQ, which I called VG10 instead of F15. I missed the Indian cent by the color. I think the others were off by 1 grade in either direction or by just the +. We weren't allowed to keep the score sheets after looking at the results, but I guess they'll be sent later, hopefully with a list of the coins that were in the box.
The exercise was fun, and a better way to try and win an MS65 $20 Saint than just a drawing. What I'd like to know, however, is how PCGS's graders would do in this challenge. Would they consistently get all 20 matches? Would misses be by no more than 1/2 grade? Would they be consistent from one week to the next? Yeah, these are probably officially some "don't go there" questions, but one cannot help but wonder. Considering that I probably don't look at anywhere near as many coins or look at them as often as many of the participants, I guess I really can't be that disappointed with my results.
BJ Searls asked if they should do this again in the future, and those of us that were gathered all thought they should. (DUH! We all wanted another shot at a cool prize!) Thanks for the opportunity!
I went through the box in less than 10 minutes (the actual time was probably logged on my scoresheet). I didn't want to spend lots of time on any given coin. The winner got 8 out of 20 matches and the lowest deviations from the actual grades among the three players that got 8 right. I managed to get 3 matches, and had I remembered to call the proof Barber dime a cameo, I'd have had 4. I picked 3 or 4 coins to assign a + grade to, but I picked the wrong ones. I graded an AU61 gold coin as 58 instead of 61 (or vice versa). I think the one I missed by the most (2 full steps) was the circ. SLQ, which I called VG10 instead of F15. I missed the Indian cent by the color. I think the others were off by 1 grade in either direction or by just the +. We weren't allowed to keep the score sheets after looking at the results, but I guess they'll be sent later, hopefully with a list of the coins that were in the box.
The exercise was fun, and a better way to try and win an MS65 $20 Saint than just a drawing. What I'd like to know, however, is how PCGS's graders would do in this challenge. Would they consistently get all 20 matches? Would misses be by no more than 1/2 grade? Would they be consistent from one week to the next? Yeah, these are probably officially some "don't go there" questions, but one cannot help but wonder. Considering that I probably don't look at anywhere near as many coins or look at them as often as many of the participants, I guess I really can't be that disappointed with my results.
BJ Searls asked if they should do this again in the future, and those of us that were gathered all thought they should. (DUH! We all wanted another shot at a cool prize!) Thanks for the opportunity!
John
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
0
Comments
Getting 8 out of 20 correct for the winner really is not to impressive. As one can see grading coins can be very subjective.
<< <i>Did you ever think "wow, this is not going to be as easy as I thought"? >>
I was never thinking "wow, this is not going to be easy," as I approached it being more curious about my grading eye than anything else. After finishing and not seeing stuff like VF bust coinage, big copper, a 3 cent silver, and an AU53 2 cent piece, I was relieved that it was apparently easier than I was anticipating. But then again, apparently it wasn't.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Even if the entire 20 coin lot were all uncs. with (+) grades sprinkled in, it would add tremendously to the statistical "pain".
Have the correct answers been posted anywhere? I kept a copy of my guesses so I could see how I did.
jim
I think you got it right with the "don't go there." While it would be interesting so see how currently employed graders would do, it's not something that would ever happen.
Imagine JA having to decide the assignment of a sticker while the grading insert is covered.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
<< <i>Have the correct answers been posted anywhere? I kept a copy of my guesses so I could see how I did. >>
No, but supposedly they'll send them to the participants. The only ones I could identify from the scored form I filled out were the Indian cent (64RD) and the proof Barber dime (PR64CAM).
<< <i>Darn, I totally forgot about that. I would've enjoyed taking that challenge. >>
Dealers weren't eligible. You had to be a collector club member.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Or do we know yet?
Sounds like a great contest.
I think the contest was a great idea and I hope PCGS continues to hold similar contests in the future.
Congrats to the winner (even at 8/20)!
Wake up people!
This sounds like a ton of fun, pardon the pun.
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
-Paul
<< <i>Just be glad there were no colonials to grade!
I think the contest was a great idea and I hope PCGS continues to hold similar contests in the future.
Congrats to the winner (even at 8/20)!
But who were/was the winners?
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
The results might also illustrate why many quality oriented folks may be fooling themselves. How many times have we all read "I don't need anyone to tell me if a coin is nice for the grade" (sticker talk and/or plus grades and/or stars)? I wonder how those self-righteous folks would have done in the grading challenge. If 8/20 is the winner, how many collectors can realistically determine quality within a single grade? All of the entrants are collector club members. Almost all are likely experienced collectors with significant grading expertise. Imagine how badly a group of newbies (less than five years in the hobby) might do in the same kind of contest. How many relative new collectors spout off about how they are interested in quality for the grade? How can a person spot quality for the grade, when they might only be getting the grade number right (if the label were covered), lets be generous, and say 50% of the time?