Rick Snow's ANA presentation "PDS Grading System"

EagleEye

Link to video on You Tube.

EastonCollection

Rick - I was present at your talk and have your brochure. Hope many listen to this and dealers use your point system in their descriptions. Great Job!

jom

Very interesting and well done. I specifically like the idea of "non-linear" making certain AU coins nice (and hence worth more) than some lower graded MS pieces.

The only question I'd have would be why Luster wasn't considered: ie a PDSL system.

Anyway, thanks for the vid!

jom

jcping

ricko

Thanks for the link Rick... I will watch it - a bit later, rushed right now. Cheers, RickO

jedm

Watched the video. Interesting subject matter with an esoteric system to determine a nice coins for the grade and the extent to which some coins may be generously graded. Something I have noticed over the years is that the dealers never seem to tout the "generously graded" coins in their inventory but are apt at pointing out which ones they feel are undergraded and or may be candidates for upgrades. It's human nature, and ownership truly does add a point or three.

TopographicOceans

All coins with the same grade are not the same, so adding more qualifiers helps to describe the coin better.

For buyers it is a definite plus to have the information.

Even without the information on the label/sticker it is a good way to evaluate the coin in hand.

Coin Finder

Thanks Rick for posting this, I will give it all my attention. Thanks!

Barndog

I just read the booklet today. I do like the idea. Imagine: evaluate the quality of the coin and not the holder and its accouterments.



How to help it catch on?

CoinZip

Thank you for sharing your link, I shared it on Facebook.

Coin Finder

I found this quite informative. A lot of work went into this I can see. Rick does a really great job! I do have a comment.... For certified circulated coins G04 to VF35, I would think the "P" planchet may weigh heavier in the system as die strike and the die wear may be hidden by wear over time.



I will say this really clears up the AU58 vs MS60-62 argument for quality quite nicely! Bravo!!!

EagleEye

This will take a long, long time for people to be comfortable with the idea. I have started using it on new listings on my web site.



For instance a beautiful toned Proof Indian cent is typically given a RB or BN designation, It doesn't really matter whether RB or BN is used to collectors of toned Indian cents. My PDS grade calls a RB coin a BN when there is really no RB to be seen. Link



I have a non photosealed PR66 that I call Gem Proof, which is really calling it a PR65 in Sheldon scale parlance. Link



In either instance it is describing the coin more fully. When it becomes more well known, I will put the PDS grade in the title. That might take 10 years.

Broadstruck

I watched the video and consider this more of a buyers check list then a grading system.



I already use something similar mentally covering 5 points when evaluating TPG coins, tokens, & medals in hand.



I will not buy anything slabbed unless it meets what I seek and I feel it can stand on it's own asking price wise raw without the plastic.



That being said coin wise it's been nearly 4 years since I added something new to my AU58 SLQ set and not for the lack of trying.

OldIndianNutKase

Rick,

Thank you for your examples that clarify you PDS grading system. But your examples pose a few questons:

1. Your example of a 1907 IHC graded PR65RB (12:3,4,5) would seem to indicate to me that it is good for the grade being 12 out of a possible 15. But you say this coin this coin a BN where there is no RB to be seen. This coin has classic RB coloring Lots of red/orange original color with tones colors. How can you determine there is no RB to be seen.

2. Your example of a 1901 IHC graded PR66+BN would seem to be overgraded because of a carbon spot on the neck. But the coin has some significant whitish toning aberations on the reverse and to a lesser extent on the obverse that would more significantly limit the greade. How does (2,3,5) relate to the carbon spot and to the toning aberrations. I agree the coin is PR65 and not 66+, but please explain the PDS scale that would reduce the grade. 2+3+5 = 10 out of 15. Or do you mean the coin is overgraded by 1.5 pts and it is 10/15 on the PDS scale, and above average for PR65?

Are we confusing existing grade vs. a more accurate grade with a adder?

OINK

Coppercolor

Rick I was lost until I rewatched the video and heard you redefine the term planchet to mean the preservation of the coin or "planchet" since it had been struck. I was expecting it to grade the original blank planchet somehow.

But am still a little lost in translation even after my second viewing of the video where the same coin could receive different Planchet and Die ratings. I would think a rating is a rating. So, are you saying "well, call it what grade you want, if you call it an AU then it has exceptional PDS ratings which are there to explain merely why it's not MS, but if you insist on calling it MS then the only way to explain the problems in the coin is to give it low PDS ratings?

Maybe I need a third rewind.

Collectors do seem to be crying for an explanation they can grasp as to why there is such variation between auction prices realized for coins of the same grade. They want an explanation beyond the current one which mystifies the answer to something like "it's high end" or "the upgrade artists went after it". And while these things could easily be true about a coin they don't really help the collector. This system does.

Are you planning to start applying it to all your coins now?

1Mike1

Rick, do you have a list of the descriptions that you used in your presentation to describe the conditions of the PDS 0-5 that you are willing to sell/mail out or put online to view?

EagleEye

I'll post the handout I had at the talk online soon.

cladking

Originally posted by: EagleEye

I'll post the handout I had at the talk online soon.

I look forward to hearing more about it.



This is a very important subject to me.



ttt

Broadstruck

Thinking about this some more I believe dealer Steve Estes used a numbering system like this which was applied to different factors to sell graded coins back in the late 1980's & mid 1990's. The problem is universal acceptance as no two hobbyist will glance at a coin and rate it exactly same. Still it's very valid as any additional tool used toward making a purchase decision. Since being picky & patient enough to acquire the right coin never hurt anyone in this hobby upon resale.

Coin Finder

NGC Grades ancients in a similar manner.. I think they use Grade, Strike, and Surface...

MrEureka

I certainly understand the problem. Grading is subjective and somewhat erratic, people game the system through resubmissions, auction prices reflect the inconsistencies, and the low prices achieved at auction by substandard coins creates a downward bias in the market.

Rick's approach, as I understand it, is to improve the usefulness of auction price records by providing the cataloger's PDS grade, if available, with each price record. This won't necessarily affect the prices coins bring at auction. Auctions are already pretty efficient in assigning "true" values to coins. But it would make for better price guides and a healthier, more stable market.

The two biggest problems with this approach are that, first, it relies on the cooperation of the auction companies, and second, the PDS grades will also be subjective and erratic.

I would suggest that a more practical and effective way to deal with the problem is through better pricing guide. By which I DO NOT mean that the guides should be more accurate, but that they should find a more effective way to present the data. For example, what if an online price guide allowed you to click through on any price to the 50 most relevant auction records, including images, date of sale, and TPG assigned grade? (Relevant auction records could include coins of the same type and of similar rarity, coins in nearby grades, etc.) All sorted by date of sale, or highest price, whichever the user prefers. And various filters could be provided.

Remember, the price realized by a coin is the best indicator of its true quality. If you know what a coin brought, and what similar coins were bringing at that point in time, you don't really need the cataloger to tell you what he thought about the coin. The information is in the price.

TireKicker

Rick,

Thank you for posting this...very informative.

Baley

I only collect coins scoring 15.



555 or pass it by!

CMCART

Intresting ????

EagleEye

I am building a PDS Grading System page where I will post articles and additional information.



Link - PDS Grading

1Mike1

Rick, so for the die are you looking for cartwheel and then the die state? If I'm understanding this, its more for a ms coin rather than a circulated coin?

Mike

EagleEye

Cartwheel luster comes from die wear. It is a factor where it is visible on Proofs (late die states) and MS coins (average die states), but on circulated coins you look at die deformation - Stars bleeding out to the rim on Bust half dollars, for example.

keets

without looking at the video I will only say that at some point a buyer needs to look at a coin and make a judgment. having a coin encapsulated by a reputable TPG, verified by CAC, previewed by a trusted dealer, etc.......................all this is good and helpful, but eventually a buyer has to make the call from looking at the coin.



it is all a little over the top for me, though well intended, and doesn't fill me with confidence.

PaleElf

Originally posted by: keets

it is all a little over the top for me, though well intended, and doesn't fill me with confidence.

grip

Originally posted by: PaleElf

Originally posted by: keets
it is all a little over the top for me, though well intended, and doesn't fill me with confidence.

+2

leothelyon

Originally posted by: grip

Originally posted by: PaleElf

Originally posted by: keets
it is all a little over the top for me, though well intended, and doesn't fill me with confidence.

+2

What is the difference between, #3 "moderate cartwheel effect" and #4, "some cartwheel effect?" And in 0, 1, 2, you make no mention of proofs but in 3, 4 and 5 on the Die state, you do. So you're saying a 4 - what has "some cart wheel effect", when it's a 5, a very early die state, will have, 'deep mirrors or matte surfaces." This is quite a jump and very confusing. Like you're mixing apples with oranges.


Leo

EagleEye

Originally posted by: leothelyon

Originally posted by: grip

Originally posted by: PaleElf

Originally posted by: keets

it is all a little over the top for me, though well intended, and doesn't fill me with confidence.

+2

What is the difference between, #3 "moderate cartwheel effect" and #4, "some cartwheel effect?" And in 0, 1, 2, you make no mention of proofs but in 3, 4 and 5 on the Die state, you do. So you're saying a 4 - what has "some cart wheel effect", when it's a 5, a very early die state, will have, 'deep mirrors or matte surfaces." This is quite a jump and very confusing. Like you're mixing apples with oranges.





Leo

I tried to be concise in the general outline. The factors are on a 0 to 5 scale with 3 being average. Too many specifics would clutter the discussion early on. I intend to bring more specifics into it as time goes on. Many people have said they are confused. Too many specifics is likely the reason.

PaleElf

It is very similar to the way NGC grades ancients.



How will your system stop gradeflation? It actually seems like it would drive gradeflation and the need for re-submission. For instance, in the CBH thread you graded the CBH a Gem AU (9: 3, 3, 3). Under the current system, the coin could be re-submitted with the hopes of jumping to MS60. Under your system, it could be resubmitted with hopes of bumping up to MS or for AU with just a single digit bump in either one of the P, D, or S. I am sure TPGs would love this because it would put pressure on collectors/dealers to resubmit coins that couldn't make the jump to MS60, but could make the smaller jump to Gem AU (10: 3, 4, 3) or any combination with a higher P, D, or S. Then re-submitted again till it becomes a Gem AU (11: 4, 4, 3) and then a Gem AU (12: 4, 4, 4). The grade still inflates. It just costs the collector/dealer more money in re-submissions because now the TFG can slowly gradeflate through multiple submissions, as opposed to one. However, I may be missing something, so can you explain this for me?

EagleEye

Originally posted by: PaleElf

It is very similar to the way NGC grades ancients.



How will your system stop gradeflation? It actually seems like it would drive gradeflation and the need for re-submission. For instance, in the CBH thread you graded the CBH a Gem AU (9: 3, 3, 3). Under the current system, the coin could be re-submitted with the hopes of jumping to MS60. Under your system, it could be resubmitted with hopes of bumping up to MS or for AU with just a single digit bump in either one of the P, D, or S. I am sure TPGs would love this because it would put pressure on collectors/dealers to resubmit coins that couldn't make the jump to MS60, but could make the smaller jump to Gem AU (10: 3, 4, 3) or any combination with a higher P, D, or S. Then re-submitted again till it becomes a Gem AU (11: 4, 4, 3) and then a Gem AU (12: 4, 4, 4). The grade still inflates. It just costs the collector/dealer more money in re-submissions because now the TFG can slowly gradeflate through multiple submissions, as opposed to one. However, I may be missing something, so can you explain this for me?

The higher the grade assigned goes, the lower the factors become, especially the planchet factor. If the 1833 Bust half from the Hamilton collection graded MS63, then the wear on the high points would drastically lower the planchet and strike factors.

Coin Finder

Coming up on 10 years since this was announced, I always liked the approach... a good video for new coin folks! Good Job Rick!

RedRocket

Seems like it would blend nicely with the ideas this board has come up as of late (the 'four-grade'-initiative).

winesteven

I really like his PDS grading method.

When Rick has an opportunity to see my IHC’s and Flying Eagle Cents in hand, I ask him if he has time, if he can give me his opinion of the PDS grades for those coins (they all have his Eagle Eye Photo Seal)! He’s been kind enough to do so, even though many of these have been bought elsewhere. I love the guy!

Steve