Is David Hall considered THE PCGS grading standard?
jessewvu
Posts: 5,065 ✭✭✭✭✭
If so, do you think there would be much of a difference between his grades and the grades of the rest of the PCGS graders? For example, if Mr. Hall and each of his graders were given 100 random coins (various denominations, grades, ect) would Mr. Hall expect a nominal distribution of grades around his or would he expect the grades to be exactly as he graded them?
I wonder if they do some sort of internal sanity check from time to time to see if the graders are getting sloppy or too conservative.
Just wondering...
I wonder if they do some sort of internal sanity check from time to time to see if the graders are getting sloppy or too conservative.
Just wondering...
0
Comments
IF I were running a TPG I would not want any one person to be representing too much, or have people thinking any individual had that much sway over all series, denoms and metals etc.. No offense to Mr. Hall of course.
There was a post a while back about PCGS and Mr. Hall's graded coins in his flips not being immediate crossovers, but I can't recall much. In the end, it will still come down to the merits of an individual coin.
Best wishes,
Eric
HRH would have to be 100% consistent - an impossibility - for him to have any hope that any other grader (or group of graders) would grade 100% like he does. So to answer your question, he would expect a normal distribution of grades. (And, edited to say, the distribution would be around the finalized grades, not around his own.)
I wonder if they do some sort of internal sanity check from time to time to see if the graders are getting sloppy or too conservative.
I'm sure they do, and I'd like to hear more from HRH or DW about how they do it.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Being one of the OT crowd, I've adjusted somewhat to today's slightly different standards, but have found it impossible to get away from my original grading roots.
Being one of the OT crowd, I've adjusted somewhat to today's slightly different standards, but have found it impossible to get away from my original grading roots.
RR - Is that just a tactful way of saying that standards have loosened, or is it more complicated than that?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>I think that one will also find a variance in grading eye's from the "old timers" who learned how to grade in the 1970's and 1980's vs. though that got started in the last 5-15 yrs.
Being one of the OT crowd, I've adjusted somewhat to today's slightly different standards, but have found it impossible to get away from my original grading roots.
RR - Is that just a tactful way of saying that standards have loosened, or is it more complicated than that? >>
Worse! Just got called old!
Eric
<< <i>I don't think he is a world class grader. And to be honest I don't think most graders are..... >>
Ah, but Mr. Eureka and I, both world-class graders who've graded at either PCGS and NGC, have known RR for over 25 years.
There are many conscientious and knowledgeable contributors here. They make useful contributions. In RR's case I value his opinion (especially on 19th Century silver type, which he has worked with on a much deeper level than I) because of his knowledge, scholarship and incisive informed analyses of coins, series and markets.
Some here revel in the democratic zeitgeist that suggests everyone's opinion matters, or matters equally. Methinks they sometimes mistake data for knowledge and knowledge for the wisdom that comes from experience. Take 25+ years of real-life triumphs and kicks in the cojones and then come back and tell me what you've learned.
Someone's sig line here has a quote from Dr. Asimov that applies.
Back on topic:
My recollection is that HRH has many times stated that, while it would more often than not approximate those of the full-time graders, his opinion is subordinate to the judgments of those creating consensus in the grading room.
<< <i>I suppose if he walked in on the graders, they would take notice. >>
Rumor has it he has been asked to leave many times. Something about light reflecting off a shirt.....
<< <i>I think that one will also find a variance in grading eye's from the "old timers" who learned how to grade in the 1970's and 1980's vs. though that got started in the last 5-15 yrs.
Being one of the OT crowd, I've adjusted somewhat to today's slightly different standards, but have found it impossible to get away from my original grading roots.
RR - Is that just a tactful way of saying that standards have loosened, or is it more complicated than that? >>
While standards loosening is part of it, there is more. For instance the shift towards blast, even if at the expense of dipping/overdipping/conservation over coins with near flawless
orig surfaces but demonstrating somewhat muted luster. I'm sure each person has their own "pet" area where they are aware of subtle changes. Not sure if this is true but it's
possible that the aging eyes of the OT crowd (myself included) has necessitated a slight alteration in how we grade today. Probably can't quantify that any more than that.
CJ - I wasn't sure if CHD was stating that HRH was not a world class grader or myself. In any case it's a no brainer than HRH is world class and I never was. No argument there.
But I do appreciate the plug. At my grading best in the later 1980's I was good enough to compete and hold my own in specific areas. I was able to observe many of the world class
graders close up during the hey days of raw coin auction buying (ie HRH, David Akers, Sil, Kevin Lipton, Rick Sear, Andy Lustig, Martin Paul, Bill Nagle, Jay Miller, Eric Streiner,
Bill Shamhart, Lee Bellisario, Larry Whitlow, Martin Haber, John Dannreuther, Greg Holloway, Jeff Garret, to name just a few that I kept an eye on. These days with major auctions
being nearly all slabbed coins, half the fun is gone. I still remember a statement from one of the Renrob guys (Ron or Bob). And that was fill a room full of dealers and the ones that
can trade and make money that day, are the ones that can grade. A lot of major players today couldn't possibly compete w/o a insert label for an anchor point.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think that one will also find a variance in grading eye's from the "old timers" who learned how to grade in the 1970's and 1980's vs. though that got started in the last 5-15 yrs.
Being one of the OT crowd, I've adjusted somewhat to today's slightly different standards, but have found it impossible to get away from my original grading roots.
RR - Is that just a tactful way of saying that standards have loosened, or is it more complicated than that? >>
While standards loosening is part of it, there is more. For instance the shift towards blast, even if at the expense of dipping/overdipping/conservation over coins with near flawless
orig surfaces but demonstrating somewhat muted luster. I'm sure each person has their own "pet" area where they are aware of subtle changes. Not sure if this is true but it's
possible that the aging eyes of the OT crowd (myself included) has necessitated a slight alteration in how we grade today. Probably can't quantify that any more than that.
CJ - I wasn't sure if CHD was stating that HRH was not a world class grader or myself. In any case it's a no brainer than HRH is world class and I never was. No argument there.
But I do appreciate the plug. At my grading best in the later 1980's I was good enough to compete and hold my own in specific areas. I was able to observe many of the world class
graders close up during the hey days of raw coin auction buying (ie HRH, David Akers, Sil, Kevin Lipton, Rick Sear, Andy Lustig, Martin Paul, Bill Nagle, Jay Miller, Eric Streiner,
Bill Shamhart, Lee Bellisario, Larry Whitlow, Martin Haber, John Dannreuther, Greg Holloway, Jeff Garret, to name just a few that I kept an eye on. These days with major auctions
being nearly all slabbed coins, half the fun is gone. I still remember a statement from one of the Renrob guys (Ron or Bob). And that was fill a room full of dealers and the ones that
can trade and make money that day, are the ones that can grade. A lot of major players today couldn't possibly compete w/o a insert label for an anchor point. >>
From what I can see in the grading room, and how the coins are graded, which isn't much! I can tell you with out a doubt it goes WAY to fast. Come on now I'm paying a guy, "world class graders" to grade my coin in like two or three seconds? I for one have a hard time with that! I don't even think it's possible! I would like to see a little more time spent on grading in the grading room. Yes I also am a old timer and have been a collector since I was about 12 years of age, I have handled many coins in my life and let me tell ya, ya can't grade a coin in 2-3 seconds, or is this just me? I know with out question some folks are very good at summing up a coin and Home Run Hall is with with question one of those folks. I am in no way bashing Mr.Hall or anyone one else at their professional grading skills I am just wondering how fast world class grader is expected to sum up, or grade a coin and still be eofficiant. I really don't think there is a handful of coin graders that can efficiently grade ALL series of U.S. coins at such a fast pace, and I think it is expected of them to move things along.
Now, how long does it take YOU to grade a coin? I'm talking RAW coins, coins you may purchase, how long? I think it would take a life time to be REALLY good at grading all series of U.S. coins. Just my take....Joe
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I think that one will also find a variance in grading eye's from the "old timers" who learned how to grade in the 1970's and 1980's vs. though that got started in the last 5-15 yrs.
Being one of the OT crowd, I've adjusted somewhat to today's slightly different standards, but have found it impossible to get away from my original grading roots.
RR - Is that just a tactful way of saying that standards have loosened, or is it more complicated than that? >>
While standards loosening is part of it, there is more. For instance the shift towards blast, even if at the expense of dipping/overdipping/conservation over coins with near flawless
orig surfaces but demonstrating somewhat muted luster. I'm sure each person has their own "pet" area where they are aware of subtle changes. Not sure if this is true but it's
possible that the aging eyes of the OT crowd (myself included) has necessitated a slight alteration in how we grade today. Probably can't quantify that any more than that.
CJ - I wasn't sure if CHD was stating that HRH was not a world class grader or myself. In any case it's a no brainer than HRH is world class and I never was. No argument there.
But I do appreciate the plug. At my grading best in the later 1980's I was good enough to compete and hold my own in specific areas. I was able to observe many of the world class
graders close up during the hey days of raw coin auction buying (ie HRH, David Akers, Sil, Kevin Lipton, Rick Sear, Andy Lustig, Martin Paul, Bill Nagle, Jay Miller, Eric Streiner,
Bill Shamhart, Lee Bellisario, Larry Whitlow, Martin Haber, John Dannreuther, Greg Holloway, Jeff Garret, to name just a few that I kept an eye on. These days with major auctions
being nearly all slabbed coins, half the fun is gone. I still remember a statement from one of the Renrob guys (Ron or Bob). And that was fill a room full of dealers and the ones that
can trade and make money that day, are the ones that can grade. A lot of major players today couldn't possibly compete w/o a insert label for an anchor point. >>
From what I can see in the grading room, and how the coins are graded, which isn't much! I can tell you with out a doubt it goes WAY to fast. Come on now I'm paying a guy, "world class graders" to grade my coin in like two or three seconds? I for one have a hard time with that! I don't even think it's possible! I would like to see a little more time spent on grading in the grading room. Yes I also am a old timer and have been a collector since I was about 12 years of age, I have handled many coins in my life and let me tell ya, ya can't grade a coin in 2-3 seconds, or is this just me? I know with out question some folks are very good at summing up a coin and Home Run Hall is with with question one of those folks. I am in no way bashing Mr.Hall or anyone one else at their professional grading skills I am just wondering how fast world class grader is expected to sum up, or grade a coin and still be eofficiant. I really don't think there is a handful of coin graders that can efficiently grade ALL series of U.S. coins at such a fast pace, and I think it is expected of them to move things along.
Now, how long does it take YOU to grade a coin? I'm talking RAW coins, coins you may purchase, how long? I think it would take a life time to be REALLY good at grading all series of U.S. coins. Just my take....Joe >>
Well said.
i'd also think
new graders would be tested with this standard before being shackled and released into the dungeon
david nor any other staff have set a grade...all grades were comprised in team effort by industry respected individuals
i would more so wonder how frequent eye exams are
i know my vision is forever changing due to close-up studies...thank god i'm not into half dimes or trimes
Take the world class graders at PCGS and give them, say, 6 or 7 seconds a coin ... I suspect you would be working them at a "snail's pace" if you told them to "speed it up" to take 6 or 7 seconds a coin (and 10 seconds for the coins worth $20,000 and higher)!
Wondercoin
<< <i>Now, how long does it take YOU to grade a coin? I'm talking RAW coins, coins you may purchase, how long? I think it would take a life time to be REALLY good at grading all series of U.S. coins. Just my take....Joe >>
This is a great question. Professional graders do not take more than about 10 seconds to grade a coin unless there is something that draws there attention. Professional graders often do not use a loupe unless the coin is small or again, something draws there attention. A paradoxical effect of taking a long time (e.g. 60 seconds) to grade a coin is that the observer tends to over-analyze the coin and hence grade incorrectly.
While 10 seconds doesn't sound like a lot of time, if you do this for a living, it's long enough. Try this as an experiment. Pick a series of interest to you about which you have some experience at grading relatively accurately and precisely.* Let's select Morgan and Peace dollars as an example. View and grade (on your own an check the slabs afterwards for accuracy/precision) 100 or so of the coins. By the end of that 100, see how fast you can grade each subsequent coin. I'll bet you are a lot faster than when you started and you likely need a loupe much less (if at all). Now, imagine you do the same thing 10 hours a day, 6 days a week, for a couple of years while being trained by other experts.
Have some spare time? Read Malcolm Gladwell's book "Blink." It's an interesting exploration into "expertise" and how experts think differently about their field.
*This assumes a baseline of grading skill.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
it maybe 2 second grading but that's by 3 graders
with a finalizer overseeing the 3
i think it works out to 6 to 8 seconds by 3 to 4 sets of eyes
<< <i> It is too bad that one's grading skills and one's ego can be so intertwined on these boards. Many of the members here believe that the higher the number of years in the hobby equates to better grading skills which may not be necessarily true other than having the most practice but sometimes the essence of grading is never achieved.
Take the ego's out of the equation, take your time and use your loupes and turn the coin in your hand endlessly and the truth will be uncovered. Sometimes what was taught years ago is the wrong education, it isn't always what was done then that is always right now but what is known now after years of improving or adding on to one's knowledge base. Experience and education and change is what counts in my book. >>
You forget one important factor which cannot be taught: Talent.
Its skillful application over many years create a knowledge of one's own capabilities that might be confused with ego. However, knowledge and the security of recognizing one's own strengths are healthy, not unhealthy, manifestations of ego. A prodigious memory for coins, excellent pattern recognition abilities, and facility with numbers including extrapolationary skills, talents actualized by the acquisition of necessarily skills, separate the best from the mundane.
So I thank you for explicating your unrealistic view of how a coin is evaluated. Wonderful in theory, it reflects little of practice by the best. "You and I can take hours". It helps to delineate a divide between anything that can be learned by rote and that which is intuitive.
Grading at a high level is not performed just by vision, but a gestalt awareness that, if it can be taught at all, takes years to develop. Except for some geniuses who just "get it". I am not among them, but am lucky to have some special spark that has served me well. And I have honed it with decades of practice. Literally millions of coins. How's that for a knowledge base?
Ego? Hell yes, but I have the skills and the knowledge to back it up. So it's self-knowledge too. And I know what I don't know too. Mostly.
Your theory is interesting, but at the higher levels of the grading game it has almost nothing to do with reality. Being nearsighted helps a lot too. And what, pray tell, is the "essence of grading" besides poetry?
You are pissing on the heads of giants without understanding you are standing on their shoulders.
Where is that quote from Dr. Asimov when I need it?
perhaps a statistician can chime in as to the odds of 100 coins having exactly the same grade with 3 graders
<< <i>I completely disagree, while what you say is all true it is the main reason grading is so subjective and why so many mistakes are made and why we have tos end in coins constantly to be graded again until they supposedly get it right or to our satisfaction. You and I have the time and the loupes to spend hours inspecting a coin, we see what the graders don't take the time to see. So when the graders vierw the coin for whatever seconds that is why they often miss what doesn't stand out and make the errors that they do. Yes I call it errors only due to a lack of time not due to a lack of expertise. I understand that to have a grading business be successful this is the way it is, just seconds per coin but in the end the graders miss a lot and we are left with trying to make it right by resubmitting. Of course no one resubmits an over graded coin wo it is very onesided and that may be due to the fact that the graders must err on the side of caution when grading. >>
Your position fails to account for the possibility that two world-class graders will indeed be able to see
everything they need to in a very short time, but having done so, simply disagree on the exact grade.
<< <i>You are pissing on the heads of giants without understanding you are standing on their shoulders. >>
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Me? Just a good enough amateur to avoid bankrupting myself on my purchases of raw and slabbed coins. Buying the plastic as a collectible in itself instead of the coin kind of takes away the oressure to even look at the coin especially with astigmatism you often see two coins instead of one and that is really difficult because which one do you grade - the one on the left, or the one on the right???????
"Me? Just a good enough amateur to avoid bankrupting myself on my purchases of raw and slabbed coins"
I agree completely
<< <i>
<< <i> It is too bad that one's grading skills and one's ego can be so intertwined on these boards. Many of the members here believe that the higher the number of years in the hobby equates to better grading skills which may not be necessarily true other than having the most practice but sometimes the essence of grading is never achieved.
Take the ego's out of the equation, take your time and use your loupes and turn the coin in your hand endlessly and the truth will be uncovered. Sometimes what was taught years ago is the wrong education, it isn't always what was done then that is always right now but what is known now after years of improving or adding on to one's knowledge base. Experience and education and change is what counts in my book. >>
You forget one important factor which cannot be taught: Talent.
Its skillful application over many years create a knowledge of one's own capabilities that might be confused with ego. However, knowledge and the security of recognizing one's own strengths are healthy, not unhealthy, manifestations of ego. A prodigious memory for coins, excellent pattern recognition abilities, and facility with numbers including extrapolationary skills, talents actualized by the acquisition of necessarily skills, separate the best from the mundane.
So I thank you for explicating your unrealistic view of how a coin is evaluated. Wonderful in theory, it reflects little of practice by the best. "You and I can take hours". It helps to delineate a divide between anything that can be learned by rote and that which is intuitive.
Grading at a high level is not performed just by vision, but a gestalt awareness that, if it can be taught at all, takes years to develop. Except for some geniuses who just "get it". I am not among them, but am lucky to have some special spark that has served me well. And I have honed it with decades of practice. Literally millions of coins. How's that for a knowledge base?
Ego? Hell yes, but I have the skills and the knowledge to back it up. So it's self-knowledge too. And I know what I don't know too. Mostly.
Your theory is interesting, but at the higher levels of the grading game it has almost nothing to do with reality. Being nearsighted helps a lot too. And what, pray tell, is the "essence of grading" besides poetry?
You are pissing on the heads of giants without understanding you are standing on their shoulders.
Where is that quote from Dr. Asimov when I need it? >>
You gotta love the newbies who want to judge and question matters they have no concept of, while real experts with their years of tough classes, earning credentials and years of experience should be regarded with the respect they deserve. I am no expert in this field so I look to the real experts and their judgments on the coins I submit, with their talent, resources and well-earned respect in the field. Haughty insubordination is dangerous in any field.
I submitted an 1861-O Seated dollar, in an old PCGS MS61 holder for what they call a "presidential review" or grade review, etc.. The coin was totally original, expert dealer Garry Adkins thought the dirty look was a problem, it could be dipped to give it the standard white look, but that it might not work out well. Mr. Hall made a very interesting and appropriate judgment on the coin, that it was properly graded all things considered.
<< <i>
<< <i>I completely disagree, while what you say is all true it is the main reason grading is so subjective and why so many mistakes are made and why we have tos end in coins constantly to be graded again until they supposedly get it right or to our satisfaction. You and I have the time and the loupes to spend hours inspecting a coin, we see what the graders don't take the time to see. So when the graders vierw the coin for whatever seconds that is why they often miss what doesn't stand out and make the errors that they do. Yes I call it errors only due to a lack of time not due to a lack of expertise. I understand that to have a grading business be successful this is the way it is, just seconds per coin but in the end the graders miss a lot and we are left with trying to make it right by resubmitting. Of course no one resubmits an over graded coin wo it is very onesided and that may be due to the fact that the graders must err on the side of caution when grading. >>
Your position fails to account for the possibility that two world-class graders will indeed be able to see
everything they need to in a very short time, but having done so, simply disagree on the exact grade. >>
This and the fact that they oftimes give the same grade 20 times in a row would suggest they aren't mising much if anything.
<< <i>I wonder how the quick grading time plays into the detection of good forgeries. A well done added or removed mint mark, VDB, etc. would seem to be difficult to detect in 3 seconds without any sort of magnification. >>
I think it would be false to assume that every coin is given 3 seconds of time. I would think that those coins known to be frequently altered, copied, doctored, etc. would be given an adequate examination.
That said, I have spent a fair amount of time grading raw UNC cents and nickels, many of which I have sent in for grading. I have had a modest amount of sucess in doing this. After one gets a handle on the series being evaluated (which takes some time and study) it becomes a reletively quick task to grade the coins. I know within seconds if the coin "there" or not. I don't even bother continuing with a coin that doesn't meet a minimum grade (depending on the series...for memorial cents it's MS65, anything less is discarded.) Then it takes me another few seconds to determine if the coin is AWESOME or not. These coins are usually in the MS66-67 range...it only takes a few seconds to make that determination as well. I usually don't need more than 5 seconds to evaluate a coin (frequently more like 2 or 3 seconds,) unless there is something special about a coin...then I will take my time.
And I don't do this all day long...I think a few seconds is plenty of time for a professional grader to assess a coin correctly. I'll bet it's even more accurate when they take less time, that way it isn't overthought. First impressions tend to be most accurate.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>With respect to the time spent grading each coin, I think - based on experience in the grading room and, more importantly, common sense - that it's fair to say that a grader will spend as much time as it takes to confidently grade a coin. For me, that might have meant a minimum of 3 seconds a coin, when grading things like a homogenous run of fresh white original MS 64-65 1881-S dollars - you get in a groove and fly with it - or a maximum of several minutes, when a coin has possibly been doctored, or if there are doubts on authenticity, etc. I could talk about averages, but it's not really relevant. The key, like I said before, is that a grader will spend as much time on a coin as it takes to do a good job. >>
Simple, concise and full of wisdom. Great response!
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>
<< <i>I think that one will also find a variance in grading eye's from the "old timers" who learned how to grade in the 1970's and 1980's vs. though that got started in the last 5-15 yrs.
Being one of the OT crowd, I've adjusted somewhat to today's slightly different standards, but have found it impossible to get away from my original grading roots.
RR - Is that just a tactful way of saying that standards have loosened, or is it more complicated than that? >>
While standards loosening is part of it, there is more. For instance the shift towards blast, even if at the expense of dipping/overdipping/conservation over coins with near flawless
orig surfaces but demonstrating somewhat muted luster. I'm sure each person has their own "pet" area where they are aware of subtle changes. Not sure if this is true but it's
possible that the aging eyes of the OT crowd (myself included) has necessitated a slight alteration in how we grade today. Probably can't quantify that any more than that.
>>
There's much wisdom in the above. I also notice that over the last 15 years, I have seen changing standards re color with respect to old copper. Ie., if the coin has less than 20% original RD, it now seems to be considered BN. I have also seen a number of Large & Half Cents in more recent RD holders that are imo 85-90% RD.
What is and is not "market acceptable" imo is the 800 pound gorilla in the room now. I didn't see this as an issue 15 years ago. I am specifically addressing Draped Bust and earlier material. Clearly, tooling, abrasive cleaning, and obvious artificial toning will get a coin bagged. The TPGs have been consistent here. However, imo, I see coins that are slabbed that if they were of a later series, this would not be the case. Net grading of the early coins also can be an issue.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Is David Hall considered THE PCGS grading standard?
I don't have a clue......and I don't think anyone can or will be able to answer with any kind of certainty, but IMO they don't call him Home Run Hall for nothing
It is "unfortunately" not the David Hall grading service!?!?! While I do have input on oveall policy, and sometimes the individual grade of ultra rarities (when they ask my opinion), the final PCGS grade is always a consensus opinion. I usually agree wih the PCGS final grade but sometimes I don't. When I do disagree, I am sometimes right and sometimes wrong. But that's how it goes when it comes to grading coins. Even the best experts are sometimes "wrong", even when they fail to admit it.
hrh
Regardless of the area of expertise, the true sages in any endeavor always respond in the same style. They are confident in their knowledge, accurate in their portrayal of it, and willing to take the time to deal with the people who really want to learn.
I have always liked this Forum for that reason (as well as others).
Drunner
From my own experiences in choice to gem unc toned 19th century silver I've rarely had any coin get the same grade 3 or 4 times in a row. But I've also never tried
any coin more than 4X. My own feeling in this specific area is that grade "repeatability" (ie getting the same grade again) runs about 50-80% with the norm around 60-70%.
The coins that get the same grade in a row over and over are very high end "no brainer's" that just miss by a tad. Those kinds of coins are in very short supply today as most
of them were grade bumped in the 1998-2008 era. I'm confident that the MS64 1856-0 quarter that I tried 4X would have made MS65 before the 20th try. But it wasn't going
to be me wasting the time and money. Ironically, that coin made MS65 by the next owner within a couple of submissions....but it was played with to make that happen.
A shame for a coin that today with have been a 64+ beaned coin and essentially worth close to low end 65 money. Too bad there wasn't a + grade back in 2007 or this potential
condition census coin would have survived. In fact a lot of coins would have been saved if a + grade came along a lot earlier.
In watching those top dealers at auction it didn't take them typically more than 5-10 seconds to figure out a grade to buy at. For coins that were liners or pricey, maybe 30 sec to
a minute might have been spent. As Mr. Eureka mentioned already, adequate time is spent to make a good decision. After all, these guys are spending their money to buy, something
the TPG graders don't have to factor in. Warren Mills would have been on my list as well but I don't recall him spending much time, if any at the auctions back in the later 1980's. Most
of the guys that cycled through Jim Halperin's NERCG turned out to be pretty darn good graders.
Several points were made, and I quote from this interview on the NGC site:
MR: I agree, there’s been a learning curve at work. I believe that the early years of NGC and PCGS saw conservative grading because they were young companies out to prove themselves, get market share, introducing a new concept. You yielded a lot of power and had to be careful, earn your “oats,” so to speak. Does this make sense?
MS: Initially we were very conservative, but again you have to consider the pricing level at the time. For example, the Greysheet price for a so-called MS 65 Barber Quarter was about $3,000, way over what a realistic MS 65 was trading at in the marketplace, about $1,500. So the coin that we graded MS 65 was probably a 66 or 67 to equate to the coin that was necessary to fulfill the $3,000 price. We were grading based on value as well. Today’s pricing is substantially more efficient leading to a more efficient market. To put this into perspective, I have personally looked at over five million coins. Take dated gold coins. That’s an area in which not many people prior to 1986 specialized. At NGC we have seen thousands of such coins in a variety of grades and dates; so one learns from this vast exposure. Factors such as strike and luster that can be unique to certain dates and varieties must be learned, and we’ve done that. So the dated gold coins that we graded, say EF 45 during our early years may be today’s mid-range or higher AU.
MR: Where do you think we are now on that learning scale? Have we leveled off?
MS: I think we have. After doing this job for almost 25-years, I know the most important thing for NGC to do is put the right grade on the holder. Period. I’ve worked with an incredible team here that’s mostly been in place for 15-years now. Through-and-through they are top-notch talent and have been for decades. Sure, we’re still learning all the time, but 20+ million coins in, we’re definitely at the top-end of the learning curve.
MR: What are the toughest coins or series to grade? And what are the easiest?
MS: For me, Bust coins are very difficult to grade due to strike factors and the perception that cabinet friction may or not be actual rub. These coins were typically struck poorly, luster is often subdued. Also, early copper coins are tough because so much of it has been cleaned, repaired or retooled, and there are corrosion issues. The Mickley specimen of the 1804 $1 is an example of the difficulty grading these early coins. It was sent to NCS, our conservation service. For decades the coin was considered an AU. It was covered with PVC. We skillfully removed it. Full mirrors were revealed! While the coin had a weak strike, it was fairly graded as a MS 62, and that’s how we graded it. It sold at auction for about $3.8 million.
The criticism I got over that was representative of the misunderstanding of how those coins were struck. Critics said Walter Breen graded the coin AU 50. Jim Halperin of Heritage Capital, no slouch when it comes to grading coins, questioned me why the coin wasn’t graded MS 63 and said that some day it would be! What’s the easiest to grade? For me, silver dollars are, especially the Morgans, as they have the type of design that quickly reveals problems. Another area that’s easy for me to grade is commems; I used to specialize in them.
With all this stuff about who is the greatest grader and grading rooms full of old guys
or young guys and if any of them have enough knowledge to grade a coin correctly.
And all the talk of the old days and no slabs and now everything has to be in encased
in a piece of plastic before it is accepted as a coin. Then WHY does every collector with
any brains say, "Buy The Coin, Not The Slab". If a collector really believes that then what's
the deal about a little slip of paper laid to rest with a coin that says what some other
person thinks the grade is. Does it matter who the grader was because when it get's right
down to if you are going to buy the coin and be happy with it or not and keep sending it back
to get a better are YOU not the grader that makes the decision about any coin? Some times
I wish I could break away from the heard of sheep that buys slabed coins for the grade just
because some other guy said it was this grade or that grade but that is very hard to do in
this age of coin collecting. Aw how I yearn for the old days of Unc, BU and Gem Bu but alass
those days are gone forever.
Define world class grader. My criteria is that if the #1 TPG (PCGS) gives my submissions grades that I concur with 80% of the time that is good enough.
Anything less than 80%,I would seriously need to consider evaluating if I know wth I'm doing.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>This and the fact that they oftimes give the same grade 20 times in a row would suggest they aren't mising much if anything.
From my own experiences in choice to gem unc toned 19th century silver I've rarely had any coin get the same grade 3 or 4 times in a row. But I've also never tried
any coin more than 4X. My own feeling in this specific area is that grade "repeatability" (ie getting the same grade again) runs about 50-80% with the norm around 60-70%.
The coins that get the same grade in a row over and over are very high end "no brainer's" that just miss by a tad. Those kinds of coins are in very short supply today as most
of them were grade bumped in the 1998-2008 era. I'm confident that the MS64 1856-0 quarter that I tried 4X would have made MS65 before the 20th try. But it wasn't going
to be me wasting the time and money. Ironically, that coin made MS65 by the next owner within a couple of submissions....but it was played with to make that happen.
A shame for a coin that today with have been a 64+ beaned coin and essentially worth close to low end 65 money. Too bad there wasn't a + grade back in 2007 or this potential
condition census coin would have survived. In fact a lot of coins would have been saved if a + grade came along a lot earlier.
In watching those top dealers at auction it didn't take them typically more than 5-10 seconds to figure out a grade to buy at. For coins that were liners or pricey, maybe 30 sec to
a minute might have been spent. As Mr. Eureka mentioned already, adequate time is spent to make a good decision. After all, these guys are spending their money to buy, something
the TPG graders don't have to factor in. Warren Mills would have been on my list as well but I don't recall him spending much time, if any at the auctions back in the later 1980's. Most
of the guys that cycled through Jim Halperin's NERCG turned out to be pretty darn good graders. >>
I should have stated that if it fails to upgrade after 20 times they probably aren't missing much, if anything.
David Hall is most definitely the PCGS 'grading standard'......
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Yeah, that goes w/o saying. And in a perfect world they will get it correct another 80X in a row too for 100 total. But that's not where we live.
If anyone who has submitted the same coin in the 10X to 20X range I'd be interested in knowing if they got the same grade every time. I'd be floored if
such a thing has ever happened. In the previous booming market such a coin that was so solid it would keep on getting the same grade would almost surely
find a "loose" day at the TPG and get bumped up into a final tomb. But no doubt any coin that has gotten the same grade 4X or 10X or even 20X is properly graded.
I would agree too the HRH is the PCGS grading standard. Toss 3 or 4 more people of his caliber and I'd be happy with the consensus grade.