Grading over the years

Exbrit · August 28, 2015 10:08AM

This has been discussed before but not recently:

Over the years has there been periods of tighter and looser grading by the TPGs? For comparison how does the grading from the 1970s, 1980s compare with today? What about other periods?

morgansforever · August 28, 2015 10:41AM

Someone in the late 80's felt this was a 62, would probably would go 62+ now. Housed in a NGC fatty.

This one came out of a 2000 ish NGC holder, graded MS63. Cracked it out because the holder was horribly scratched. Those are die polish lines on the obverse.
The reverse has what appears to be black blemishes around the wing area, flashy n silvery in-hand, definitely part of the minting process. Might even get a plus
by today's standards. One of my favorite 63's

CaptHenway · August 28, 2015 10:50AM

The issue is very complicated. Not only do TPG grading standards rise and fall, but the market grading standards rise and fall. The two are not synonymous.

Also, there are different standards for rare dates than common dates of the same type. THis makes no sense to me.

david3142 · August 28, 2015 10:51AM

I believe that coin is more likely a 64 today.

Walkerfan · August 28, 2015 12:46PM

<< I believe that coin is more likely a 64 today. >>

I'd call it a 63 but wouldn't be surprised at a 64 grade.

BustHalfBrian · August 28, 2015 4:04PM

IMO that 83 CC is a 5 all day long.

HoledandCreative · August 28, 2015 4:11PM

Probably be a 68 if not for all of the damage.

Several decades ago, it was Brown & Dunn. I don't know if there were any grading standards published prior to B & D. If so, then B & D was probably the beginning. I think Photograde was published some time after B & D and that was what I thought was the beginning of gradeflation. Imo.

jdimmick · August 28, 2015 10:45PM

CPT Henway nailed it.

CaptHenway · August 28, 2015 11:00PM

<< Probably be a 68 if not for all of the damage.

Several decades ago, it was Brown & Dunn. I don't know if there were any grading standards published prior to B & D. If so, then B & D was probably the beginning. I think Photograde was published some time after B & D and that was what I thought was the beginning of gradeflation. Imo. >>

Brown and Dunn & Photograde dealt with grading circulated coins. Sheldon had his definitions for MS-60, 65 and 70. When I started the grading part of ANACS in 1979 I added MS-63 and MS-67 and decided what 60, 63, 65, 67 and 70 meant. Since then the definitions have been changed several times.

winky · August 28, 2015 11:03PM

<< Probably be a 68 if not for all of the damage.

Several decades ago, it was Brown & Dunn. I don't know if there were any grading standards published prior to B & D. If so, then B & D was probably the beginning. I think Photograde was published some time after B & D and that was what I thought was the beginning of gradeflation. Imo. >>

DUH, what a thought.

roadrunner · August 28, 2015 11:19PM

<< I believe that coin is more likely a 64 today. >>

Probably so. Looks a solid 64 to me unless the luster is burnt. Couldn't possibly be less than a 63+ imo. I'd split grade the coin 64 obverse with a 65 reverse. Hard to get 62 or even a 63 out of that.

This same coin in January 1980 would have at worst a borderline gem or sold as full MS65. And by 1982, it would have been back to choice unc or MS63. A 62 grade on this coin in 1990 (old fatty days) was pretty harsh imo. Maybe there are some hidden hairlines.

The real grade on this coin would be choice unc. all the way from 1975-2015....a 40 year span. The real grade has been fairly steady. But you can see that its market value has wandered about from MS62 to nearly MS65.

Please ship me all your MS62's looking like this 83cc.....preferably rarer dates like 93-0, 94-0, 95-0, 96-0, etc.

TopographicOceans · August 29, 2015 12:20AM

Things change

Wabbit2313 · August 29, 2015 12:43AM

Things change day to day. I have coins that went between 64 and 66 in 3 submissions. Those same things happened years ago and there are some undergraded and overgraded coins in every era. CAC baby! That is where you don't find overgraded coins.

LindeDad · August 29, 2015 12:56AM

<< Things change >>

david3142 · August 29, 2015 1:07AM

The second coin looks like a 65 to me. I echo the sentiment above. Send me all your coins that look like those 2 and I'll gladly pay you MS63 money.

GoldCoin98 · August 30, 2015 9:23AM

If the pictures are accurate both of those Morgans should be in 65 holders

vplite · August 30, 2015 9:43AM

The 1883 CC appears about right for a 63 today.

The 1878 S is a solid 64; it could stretch to 65.

morgansforever · August 30, 2015 9:50AM

<<If the pictures are accurate both of those Morgans should be in 65 holders>>

It's the best images I can produce, with just a dash of contrast in post edit.

roadrunner · August 30, 2015 11:27AM

<< Things change day to day. I have coins that went between 64 and 66 in 3 submissions. Those same things happened years ago and there are some undergraded and overgraded coins in every era. CAC baby! That is where you don't find overgraded coins. >>

Not always true. I saw a CAC MS68 Bust half that I wouldn't have graded higher than 66+. In my mind it was over-graded. Differences of opinions do ask though.

Hard to believe NGC could have graded that 1878-s MS63 back in 2000. At that time most silver dollars like that would have graded 65 or even 66. Nice gold sticker candidates...unfortunately that can't tell if you have 2 point grade bumps. Maybe some day CAC comes out with "platinum" sticker for 2 points undergraded.

Grading over the years

Comments

Leave a Comment