Gradeflation has occurred in the lower grades too!
Insider2
Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
I've observed big changes in the F-15 to VF-20 range too. In the good old days, a Very Fine was a sharply detailed coin, often with obvious original luster.
I just caught myself trying to grade a pleasing gray, no problem, Fine Seated coin VF-20! Take a look at what the Fine and VF Seated halves and quarters look like on our host's grading site.
Have you subconsciously (?) pushed a grade and the "alarm bell" in your head pulled you back to reality? At least I have others working here in case I "go-off-the-tracks" on a coin and don't catch it. 
5
Comments
Grade-flation has effected the lower grades from the very beginning of encapsulation, especially for the key dates.
Lots and lots of stuff that would have never rated above fine before 1990 now gets called very fine. Tons of that.
Keys have been over graded for a long time to reflect their value. Very many 16-D dimes graded Good look like
AG-3's in the grading guides.
Funny how key dates are graded more loosely and more strictly at the same time. I feel like I keep hearing both around here.
Collector, occasional seller
**Have you subconsciously (?) pushed a grade and the "alarm bell" in your head pulled you back to reality? **
I tend to do the opposite, and sell raw coins too cheap by under grading a bit....but at least I have happy customers.
I also refuse to buy raw or slabbed coins that I feel have been grade-flated a bit too much. I can't believe what some dealers are now calling VF for early walkers. I was ok when a lower VF allowed some missing bustline, but now it's to the point where any trace of bust is being called VF.
I think it depends a lot on the coin. For example, If it is an 1804 dollar vs a 1901-S quarter.
You and I sharply disagree on this issue. Your argument is circular. If the keys are almost always over graded, the bids on the Gray Sheet are lower. A customer and I learned that when he gave me a want list for a 1916-D Mercury Dime. We looked at the prices and figured that a VF would work for him. At the time I though that the Gray Sheet number was low, and I soon learned why.
When I looked the coin, I found out that what had been VG was now VF with half of the vertical ax lines showing. The customer and I discussed the situation, and I ultimately bought an EF graded coin to fit his needs.
I wrote this rather than hitting you with a “disagree.”
Yep. In the Buffalo Nickel Series, this has been going on since the end of the OGH "Greenies". "Overall Wear", "Market Graded" and "Strike Adjusted" Buffs now do not have to show a full horn to the tip to be a VF.
OK. I hate it. I grudgingly understand the reasoning, though, There just ain't enough "True Buffs" at VF and above to satisfy demand. Some even go from AU to Fine with just a little rub. 21-S, 26-S and D and 24-S are big culprits, just to name a few.
That don't really bother me, because I plucked all the real ones long ago. One of these days I'm gonna have to submit my F-15 1921-S so it becomes a nice XF specimen.
Am I cheating?
Pete
Thanks, but I think we are saying the same thing. The old grade AG (my case) and VG (your case) are now often over graded as G (my case) and VF (your case). I cannot comment on the gray sheet as I don't care what the price is. That's what the finalizer is for. He keeps me in check when a coin's commercial value is not reflected in my grade.
I often feel I'm tolerated as just an old dinosaur because I've studied the surfaces and originality of the coins I examine much closer than most. I look at every submitter as a person trying to get something past me and I take it as a challenge. My job is to let the guys know if a coin is C/F, not original, or fraudulently altered. I also get to put a grade on it.
**You and I sharply disagree on this issue. Your argument is circular. If the keys are almost always over graded, the bids on the Gray Sheet are lower. **
I'm with Bill on this....Rick Snow, who knows more about IHC's and the market than probably anyone on the planet, harped on this many times in the past, using the 1877 as an example. As numerous 'partial LIBERTY' coins were getting into VF holders, the Bid prices went down. So when a tough grader like Rick offers an 1877 in VF and customers pull out the 'sheet', as his VFs are real, old school VF's, and he wasn't going to give them away, his prices appear too high.
Of course, the auctions and market eventually figures this out:
https://coins.ha.com/itm/a/1261-16100.s
Perfect example of buy the coin, not the holder!!
Please give photographic examples, otherwise these assertions are anecdotal. What are we talking about, key dates or common dates?
The Official American Numismatic Association Grading Standards for United States Coins
This book has been around for decades and has specific details for each circulated grade for most of the popular series.
For Buffalo nickels, it has a list of which years have worn dies where VF can be less than full horn.
So I'm not sure why grade inflation has crept into the circulated grades.
In some marginal cases, it could be repeated resubmission of key dates to get them into the higher grade holder?
In the hands of a buyer, this will help them keep focused on the coin, not the holder, in circulated grades.
https://www.amazon.com/Official-Standards-American-Numismatic-Association/dp/0794838243
Here’s an example - a coin has to have full rims both sides to get a G04 grade:
This one is worse for a G:
Even VG8 coins don’t have full rims
Please give photographic examples, otherwise these assertions are anecdotal.
I had posted a link to a PC graded VF(?) coin from a Heritage auction to give an example of what I was talking about.
If you want a really good lesson in gradeflation across all grades and series, you need look no further than an old Brown and Dunn or ANA grading guide with the old line drawings. I have always maintained that the old line drawings did a far, far better job of showing detail wear for a grade than 99% of all the photos out there. That's why Bill Eckberg, Harry Salyards, and I chose line drawings for our EAC grading article in the last issue of Pennywise.
Using the old line drawings as a guide, current TPG coins are overgraded by at least one full grade and many are two grade levels higher in circ grades. In MS, I've seen three. Sorry, I don't care how spectacular the toning, luster, and strike is; contact marks are contact marks regardless.
This is the result of the failed concept of "market grading" wherein the standards are loosened in a rising market and supposedly tightened in a falling one. However, in practice the latter never offsets the former. The end result is an increasing disparity between the coin and the label.
This practice will continue until collectors start pressuring the ANA to return to the earlier line drawings and standards and then pressure dealers and the TPGs by using those standards when buying.
A distinct lack of fundamental, repeatable, measurable standards is the root cause of these issues. I see no reason for a 'key date' to be graded any differently than a common, plentiful date. Eventually, standards MUST be set and documented. Until then, these discussions will continue - and perhaps drive the need for standardization. Cheers, RickO
RickO,
The standards already exist. Just go pick up any old copy of B&D or the first issue of the ANA Grading Guide. The line drawings show the MAXIMUM amount of wear for any circ grade level, along with written descriptions.
Yes, this method is a bit lacking for unc coins, but with today's digital photography and the internet, it would be simple to stand up a grading site. What is missing is the desire to do so. That can be driven by collectors demanding that their clubs and the ANA take the lead. Elect officers who make this their key platform.
Once sites are created for unc and the ANA returns to the earlier line drawings and descriptions for circ, the TPGs will have no choice but to follow.
Unfortunately, the posts here show there is no real desire to do this. Look at the number of posts where the OP is thrilled that the coin came back higher than they thought or asking if a coin will cross at the present or higher grade or crack-out for a higher one. That clearly shows collectors are only interested in the "real grade" when buying. Once they own it, they want the higher fantasy grade. Sorry, it don't work like that. Either collectors want real grades or they don't. Right now, they don't.
@Rittenhouse.... I am aware of grading guides and line pictures etc. . These are NOT standards, they are guides...Standards are clearly defined, repeatable, understood and not variable. Visit NIST (National Institute of Standards). I have worked with defined, repeatable standards throughout my career, and grading guidelines are NOT standards. When we finally get standards, there will no longer be debate about grades. Cheers, RickO
As a former quality and manufacturing engineer, I too have worked with standards. The "guidelines" are standards. That they are visual in nature does not make them any less standards than those that can be measured by whatever means. And yes, I'm familiar with NIST, used to be called NBS.
The problem IS NOT a lack of standards for the grades, the problem is the unwillingness of collectors and dealers to use the standards that have existed for quite some time. Both collectors and dealers want their coins to be called the highest grade possible. Dealers so they can sell at a higher price, collectors so they can believe they have a great coin or that they "hit the jackpot."
Both of those attitudes, but particularly that of collectors, makes any grading standards DOA. I don't care if you laser measure with readings for wear, luster, etc. It won't matter as long as all keep wanting a better grade and complaining if they don't get it. Today's grading is merely a result of 30 years of constant whining by dealers and collectors.
That's what i'm talking about. I'd grade this coin G-4 also, send it to the next grader, and sleep like a baby!
Even though the rims are worn into the lettering, which is the standard for AG. And thus, we have an illustration of the issue I brought up.
@Rittenhouse: Me kinda thinks that the "real grade" is what collectors like myself strive for. Note: I said MYSELF. I will not judge any other collector for their collecting strategies. You wanna flip a coin, go ahead. A lot of the coin collecting game is played for monetary reasons, not collecting goals.
Weeding out the coins that really matter is an acquired art, especially now.
The coin doesn't change...........but sometimes the grades do.
Pete
@Rittenhouse said: "The problem IS NOT a lack of standards for the grades, the problem is the unwillingness of collectors and dealers to use the standards that have existed for quite some time."
While it is true that the "standards" existed for quite some time, They were not/have not been embraced 100% - EVER = No standards.
Furthermore, pick up a first edition of the ANA guide and compare it to the 7th Edition. THE ANA CHANGED THEIR OWN PUBLISHED STANDARDS!
I've definitely experienced this with the 1914-D Lincoln I had in my completed set. I bought the coin raw expecting it to holder at VG8... maybe a shot at 10. I was stunned when it came back holdered at F15.
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
@Rittenhouse...My career was also in Quality, 52 years....Welcome fellow Quality professional. Until we have documented, repeatable, measurable standards, we have no standards at all. Add to that, the ridiculous category of 'eye appeal' and you have no standards at all. Cheers, RickO
I would not be good if we couldn't even trust our judgement anymore due to the label in front of us
I wonder if people would submit fewer coins to be graded if they would receive lower, i.e. tighter grades on their coins instead of the “higher grades” that they hoped for?
I think that is true sometimes.
1920 MS64 Saint very loose & the MS64+ takes the place of a MS65 because no more 1920 MS65 coins are "allowed"
Now look at the 1920-S...MS64's all look like gems to me.
Another key date is not as weird (1912)
My Saint Set
This may be true is some cases but not all!
As I have stated many times before
Buy the coin not the holder!
The greysheet is a guide not a bible!
@Elemint said: ""
The below books look like they could be helpful in grading.
This one is highly recommended. Especially if you only have one. Read the first six chapters - twice.
https://www.amazon.com/Grading-Coins-Photographs-David-Bowers/dp/0794836879/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1538784536&sr=8-2&keywords=coin+grading+book
Alright Insider.
I will have to agree with you or anyone else about rampant gradeflation, but you crossed the line with your opinion, assumption, observation or what ever you want to call your trip back to a place that never existed.
" I've observed big changes in the F-15 to VF-20 range too. In the good old days, a Very Fine was a sharply detailed coin, often with obvious original luster. "
You should of not included the word OFTEN and LUSTER in your description of VF-20.
Are you currently selling any (VF) coins Insider?
Your wet cat avatar makes me LOL
@Raybo said: "...you crossed the line with your opinion, assumption, observation or what ever you want to call your trip back to a place that never existed."
Insider said: "I've observed big changes in the F-15 to VF-20 range too. In the good old days, a Very Fine was a sharply detailed coin, often with obvious original luster. "
@Rabo replied: "You should of not included the word OFTEN and LUSTER in your description of VF-20."
If you are under seventy, you were never in that place. If you have a decent general library, take out your copy of Penny Whimsey and read the description of a VF-20.
Next, close your eyes and imagine what a perfect frosty CC BU Morgan dollar looks like. Now imagine that "only the highest surfaces show wear, even when the glass is applied." How much original mint luster is still on the coin?
Obviously, you know that a VF-20 no longer looks as this. I think we all would like to buy those VF's that were around in the old days before I cared about coins.
That's how I felt after opening my last blue box
After hoping for some gradflation
My Saint Set
@ReadyFireAim
Oh well .......
If you are under seventy, you were never in that place. If you have a decent general library, take out your copy of Penny Whimsey and read the description of a VF-20.
You give me vague reference to a book that only applies to EAC and than .........................
Most collectors don't need to be introduced to this referance book. However, if you're new to collecting, understand that this is considered by many, (if not most) collectors to be the MAIN referance book for older US large cents. It covers the years 1793-1814. The book was written in the 1940's, and updated a couple of times. The author goes to great length to describe the characteristics of the different die varieties for these years. Besides the descriptions, each one is also documented with a photograph. The photos are lacking at times, but they are quite helpful none the less. Bottom line, if you're interested in Large Cents, this material is required reading
I was not vague at all. I was trying to prove to you that at one time VF coins had lots of original Mint luster. You may have not been collecting back then but the fact that you know when the book was first published indicates you were.
IMHO what you have posted is incorrect on two counts:
The Sheldon Grading System in Penny Whimsey provided a FOUNDATION for the TECHNICAL GRADING SYSTEM I devised in the early 1970's to identify coins (along with photo and weight) for the internal records of ANACS while it was located in Washington, DC. It was used at the first TPGS, INSAB.
Penny Whimsey is now a dust catcher on the library shelf as it has been replace by books that make attribution much easier with great images. I do recommend collectors read the first part of the book to learn about Large cents and how grading has evolved.
I am going to break with the orthodox, classic point of view and say that Sheldon's grading page in "Penny Whimsy" is next to useless. Trying to learn to grade without photos is like watching TV without a monitor. Listening to Sheldon's contemporaries, which I was able to do when I was in my 20s, it was like the way the Communists approached Marx's "bible'" "Capital." People spent a lot of time spinning their wheels unproductively trying to interpret it.
I started to learn to grade from the Third Edition of the Brown and Dunn book, learned a lot more from "Photograde" and then looked at tons of coins, both in person and in many auction catalogs. It was a real education to to see which houses routinely puffed up their descriptions and ones were more often accurate.
One concept I did learn from Sheldon was the value of learning to grade from surfaces. As he accurately stated, it took a lot of practice and experience, but once learned, it was of great value.
Really?
With slabbed circ material I have purchased I c no prob w the grading.
Are there VF graded coins that have some luster in the protected areas? Yes, it's unusual. More often you see are the remains of an old cleaning or the effects of what coin doctors use in their artificial toning procedures.
@BillJones said: "I am going to break with the orthodox, classic point of view and say that Sheldon's grading page in "Penny Whimsy" is next to useless."
I think any knowledgeable numismatist would agree with your statement. I don't know of any person (including Large Cent collectors) who use the grading scale in that book anymore. It is so conservative too the point of being ridiculous. The most important thing about Sheldon's old grading descriptions is that it can be used to teach a new comer about friction wear. I lecture on it in class as it was the basis for the conservative and very precise technical grading system. After laying a foundation, we move on to the realities of today's commercial grading.
@BillJones continued: "I started to learn to grade from the Third Edition of the Brown and Dunn book, learned a lot more from "Photograde." One concept I did learn from Sheldon was the value of learning to grade from surfaces. As he accurately stated, it took a lot of practice and experience, but once learned, it was of great value."
This is probably what all of us old guys did. Photograde was a landmark book.
I definitely agree that circulated grades have bumped a notch or two by the TPG's over the years. As a collector of circulated schlock, I don't really care about grades and more than half of my 70 or so draped bust halves are raw, and will remain that way until I sell - then bring on the latest plastic and stickers!
My industrial engineering background implies that coin grading should have six sigma quality with no variation in the grading process.
With my MBA background, the last thing a publicly traded company would want is for coins to be entombed forever with strict grading standards that would not evolve over time, with no chance of re-submission revenue. The leading TPG's know this.