@Insider2 said:
A member on another forum wrote that he "would prefer that the TPGS's would use net grading on early copper coins." This after a slab with a slightly corroded AU-58 1/2 cent was straight graded as an XF-45.
This was my reply to his post:
Thankfully, what you prefer will never happen.
NET grading is the most stupid, wacky, confusing, bunch of rot that was ever invented (by whom the EAC?) to try to put a value on a coin.
This is not an opinion. Anyone with any knowledge of the essence of grading a coin that's evolved into our present grading system (possibly including Dr. Sheldon himself) can come up with so many reason's to get rid of the Net Grading FOLLY that there is no need for me to post even one stupid example. The OP's coin was enough.
What do you think?
PS Please don't post comments about me or my abrasive personality in this thread - send me a PM with that nonsense. Thanks.
I agree. That's why when ANACS started grading coins I made the decision that we would use the correct technical grade AND verbally describe any significant problems. That way somebody seeing our certificate would know what they were getting.
When slabs replaced certificates they lost the ability to describe coins beyond an extremely limited number of characters. It was the hobby's loss.
TD
From the perspective of someone trying to learn how to grade coins, more detailed info would definitely be useful. For those trading coins sight unseen, net grades are best. And for those who already know how to grade, it's all irrelevant.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Sorry guys, this last statement: "technical grading that is netted down for defects" is another case of people not having a clue about what the original concept of TRUE "technical grading actually is, or how it was developed and practiced at ANACS in Washington DC ONLY for internal record keeping/coin ID; and then actually publicly USED by the first TPGS at INS's Authentication Bureau (headed by Charles Hoskins the former Director of ANACS before the move to CO). Net grading and technical grading are two completely different things.
If you get the "right" grading class instructor, you'll be taught the difference.
Comments
From the perspective of someone trying to learn how to grade coins, more detailed info would definitely be useful. For those trading coins sight unseen, net grades are best. And for those who already know how to grade, it's all irrelevant.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Sorry guys, this last statement: "technical grading that is netted down for defects" is another case of people not having a clue about what the original concept of TRUE "technical grading actually is, or how it was developed and practiced at ANACS in Washington DC ONLY for internal record keeping/coin ID; and then actually publicly USED by the first TPGS at INS's Authentication Bureau (headed by Charles Hoskins the former Director of ANACS before the move to CO). Net grading and technical grading are two completely different things.
If you get the "right" grading class instructor, you'll be taught the difference.