I never knew this about the "Sheldon Scale" - did you ? - the Great Grading Debate
1630Boston
Posts: 14,024 ✭✭✭✭✭
The basis of Sheldon’s theory was that a "70" would be worth 70 times as much as a "1.
The purpose of Sheldon's grading scale was as the basis for his theory that one could arrive at the price of a given cent using an expression of relative rarity, called "basal value", and his numerical grade. He stated that "if the condition is known, the approximate value of the coin can in most cases be arrived at by multiplying a basal or unit value by a quantitative measure of condition."
from the NNP
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Comments
I have long know the premise of the Scale and its assumed correlation to Pricing, but never read this article. Looks like the Editor is still a pretty popular name in Numismatics.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
I believe the basal background story is covered in the ANA book as well.
Another fun relative is the NGCx scale. Here's a graph on how it corresponds 1:1.
Owner, Lone Mountain Coin
Rare Ingot Collector - Always on the hunt for more!
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Founder of Pre33Goldbugs - 5500 member group
History, especially Numismatic History is great
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Thanks for the "Fun Fact".
I've never seen that article, but yes, I am/was aware of the history of the scale and how it relates to pricing. Thanks for posting it, always good to refresh history.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
I kinda understand it so I'm not gonna go confuse matters right now, fwiw
The market, in turns out, clearly disagrees: otherwise 67 coins would only cost (67/65) times the same coin in ms65!
Casual collector: Morgans & Peace Dollars & 20th Century Type Set. Successful BST transactions with Morgan13, CoinFinder, CoinHunter4, Bretsan.
Thanks for posting this article - good Sheldon dissertation.
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
Nickelodeon
The Sheldon scale is very useful. If you know what a 1799 large cent is worth G04, you can easily calculate what it would be worth in MS70.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Well, you probably could before registry sets ..
I believe Dr. Sheldon’s scale of 1-70 was meant to apply to values for 1794 Large Cents. The scale was almost immediately obsolete even if it had some initial utility in approximating the value of a Fine at say, 12x a basal state (1) and gem uncirculated (with mint red color) at 70x in 1949.
William Sheldon led quite an interesting life. His studies of somatotypes and their relations to personality had substantial influence on psychology in the mid-20th century.
Penny Whimsy, his extensive revision of Early American Cents was published in 1958, co-written with numismatic scholars Dorothy Paschal and Walter Breen.
The Sheldon scale is the basis for the Grading scale used by all the coin graders. PCGS, NGC, ICG, ANACS, etc.. The top grade being 70.
Last issue of CCC Chatter, typed in "wider" type to save 20¢ postal fees. Very interesting historical piece!!!
I don't see the pricing relative to the grade easily quantifiable. And now the Poor1 grade is sought after, whereas the Fair2 grade is a lot less so. It all depends on the series and since a perfect 70 is only obtainable with modern coins, that correlation is particularly unlikely.
My understanding is Sheldon’s 70 grade did not require perfection. Mint state large cents were graded by color: 60= no mint color, 65= some mint color, 70 most mint color (red).
The only chain cent I’ve ever seen with mint red color was Walter Husak’s S-2 in an MS 60 details ANACS holder, sold by Heritage in 2008 as lot 2001. It was described as follows:
A remarkable Chain cent with lustrous medium olive color and considerable red on exceptional surfaces. The slightest smoothing of the surfaces are mentioned by ANACS. There is no trace of wear, but a blunt strike is described by Del Bland in his Condition Census, evident on the hair around the ear and on letters of the legend. According to the New Netherlands cataloger, one of America's greatest collectors described the appearance as "liquid fire" when he first saw this coin.
Del Bland lists this coin as the finest known S-2 chain.
https://coins.ha.com/itm/large-cents/1793-chain-1c-america-ms60-details-light-surface-damage-anacs-s-2-b-2-high-r4-pcgs-35435-/a/460-2001.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515
Of course it does! The "market" was different 60+ years ago when the Sheldon Scale was an approximant guide for figuring what a Large cent was worth. Since then, the ratio has changed. > @rec78 said:
More specifically, it is the HISTORICAL BASIS for our present-day grading scale because the descriptions used back then for the grades of VF-20 and above are no longer valid.
I'm looking at Sheldon right now and you are correct about color being important for the MS grades.
"Mint State: Free from any trace of wear."
"Condition 70 means perfect Mint State."
"For condition 70, the coin must be exactly as it left the dies, except for a slight mellowing of the color."
Yes.
Most American and Canadian "Coin Collecting for Beginners" books that were put out in the 1970s and 1980s had the explanation for the origin for the Sheldon Scale. Which is only natural, since anyone encountering the Scale for the first time would naturally think "that's odd, why does it only go up to 70?". The link between grade-numeral and basal-state value in Sheldon's original book is core to that origin story.
Sheldon invented the Scale essentially as a space-saving aid for catalogue printers. This way, rather than give prices for each coin in each of the major grades (as we see in a Redbook, for example), a publisher would only need to give a single column of values, one value per coin - the basal state value. If you had a cent at a higher grade than basal state and you had such a book, you'd need to do the maths yourself to work out the value for your specific coin.
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Apparently I have been awarded one DPOTD.
@Sapyx
I don't know what a DPODT award is but let me say that you are one of my favorite posters!
It's Post of the Day, but is it dumbest POTD or something better.
A player I know uses it for a graduated pricing matrix for World graded material so to get good retail money.
The Sheldon scale - have to start somewhere?
If interested in more grading development summaries, then here is a list of Mike Sherman articles I found and listed together.
Sheldon is part 3.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1101152/grading-history-via-series-of-short-articles-by-mike-sherman
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yq4KA0mUnC8 - Dream On (Aerosmith cover) via Morgan James & Postmodern Jukebox
https://youtube.com/watch?v=m3lF2qEA2cw - Creep (Radiohead cover) via Haley Reinhart & Postmodern Jukebox
RLJ 1958 - 2023
Would like to see the next installment, but it evidently doesn’t exist.
As I have written about grading, the Sheldon system was correct when it was WRITTEN. The day it was PUBLISHED it went out the window because the very existence of the book it was published in vastly changed the Supply/Demand universe for Large Cents.
Thanks @CaptHenway
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
It would still be great to have a close correlation between grade and price,
but it is usually a nonlinear relationship and varies by coin variety, given the available populations by grade and demand.
And it has gone "full circle" for "market grading", where the grade is adjusted to correlate better with price.
As Walter Breen once said, a definition of grade is "An excuse for price."
interesting, thanks
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Run, Sapyx, run!
They are two different things.
How many times have you seen a particular rarity go for moon money because two different collectors wanted it, only to see it reappear at auction a few years later for whatever reason and the underbidder at the first auction gets it a lot cheaper because the other guy is not bidding him up?
WHICH PRICE DETERMINES THE GRADE??????
Answer: neither. The coin is what the coin is.
..
This is the kind of childish trash that adds nothing to a discussion and ruins my experience here. If you post more of these senseless attempts to build yourself up around here at my expense, I shall report you.
The market doesn't "disagree." It's just that it has evolved over time.
In the days before registry sets and points, people didn't pay crazy multiples for coins that were only a very teeny tiny bit better than others at the top of the scale. While there were not even supposed to be any 70s, since that was just theoretical perfection, a 67 probably was only 2/70ths (not 2/65ths!) more expensive than a 65.
Remember -- before TPGs and deep, liquid markets for coins in slabs, 67s and 65s were pretty indistinguishable from each other, since they were both labeled as Gem BUs as they sat in cardboard 2x2s, if not loose in paper envelopes. It's just that the 67 looked a little better than the 65, and consequently cost a little more. Probably right about 2/70ths (3%) more.
Every person in the world head contains ideas and thoughts that will be outdated tomorrow. There is obviously a spectrum but one should be able look at ideas individually even if the source is a mixed bag.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
This.
In the time of Sheldon, prices were such that they (for a while at least) worked within the parameters put forth. But- as the market evolved, they rapidly became outdated as more people realized the condition rarity in the upper tiers and competition for such grades skyrocketed. On vintage coins, gradeflation may have turned yesterday's F into today's VF, but 70 still remains only a theoretical perfection grade- and imo that is as it should be. OTOH, 70s get handed out like candy on moderns even when they aren't deserving- and on many if not most moderns, 69s may as well be raw from a value standpoint.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
.
There is also this gem (MS-65 or 66?) of a thread from 2004.
"The grading scale stops at 70 is because that is the average IQ of coin dealers."
It is based on a joking comment by David Hall (a dealer) in this Q & A thread where he posted "Some have said that if Sheldon had waited until the 1950s we may have had a 1 to 100 scale. But I knew Dr. Sheldon and I know for a fact that the reason the grading scale stops at 70 is because that is the average IQ of coin dealers".
.
.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/250500/the-grading-scale-stops-at-70-is-because-that-is-the-average-iq-of-coin-dealers
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
@JCH22:
You have a lot of value judgements in your criticism of Dr. Sheldon. I prefer to stick to the facts and let others make their own conclusions.
I can tell you that Dr. Sheldon’s theories of body habitus and its influence on personality was important enough to be mentioned when I was in medical school. His contributions to EAC scholarship are widely recognized.
The whole story of his apparent switching of coins at the ANS, the subsequent sale of his collection (for over $7 M, by teenager Eric Streiner) to R.E (Ted) Naftzger, Jr., one of the most prominent numismatists of his time, and subsequent extended court proceedings is a fascinating one.