Grading Systems For Ancients

Bobby, it my understanding that the people who grade the are experts (likely fellow collectors) who give their subjective grades and descriptions for money. I like to think they do their best, just like we do:)

FR. It could very well be a bleak future:(
This is why I say education and a common language is a must for this hobby.

Your right to look for discussion, I think your also right to keep this discussion out of the sticky. I get a little worried whenever grading and slabs are mentioned. I feel if they 'take-off' in ancients all that will happen is I end up paying extra for coins and getting frustrated at 'experts' subjective opinions on how good those coins are. I'll still buy the same coins but it will cost me more and I won't be allowed to touch them anymore.

I should add I don't consider many of these new 'experts', experts. What I fear is the TPGs will push slabs and grades onto new collectors and in 10 years time its the norm, you cant sell without a slab and grade, therefore you cant buy either. It could easily happen and would ruin the hobby.

To me it all feels like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. The modern system can not work, but people seem obsessed with assigning numbers to abstract things, so they can compare them with others. The TPGs will happily tell you their systems are fine for ancients, they just want a new market to move into, they want your money.

Most of the things we buy and love are not graded but we manage just fine.

I'm not trying to start any heated debates here, just my observations sometimes come across a little inflammatory

Slabbing ancient coin are a total waste of time and money IMO. If I were to ever buy a slabbed ancient the first thing I would do is to crack it out so that I can hold it in my hand. As to grading, even Sear lists grades in his books. It is very subjective, one persons EF could be another's VF. However grades are relevant especially to sellers which I'm not. I think they also apply when cataloging a collection especially when there are a number of the same coin type. Along with catalog numbers I also use grades for that purpose.

The purpose of the sticky I started was so that those that are interested in learning about grading would get and idea what others thought about their coins and what are good and bad points that effect the value of their coins.

I am liking this discussion but I am more concerned about a common language to discuss coins in terms of grading (evaluating a coin). Forget about the slab.
To heck with NGC!... but what do you think about their criteria? Are their descriptors valid? Do we want to use there criteria?

The 2 systems above offer ways of discussing ancients. At the same time, trouble can start when similar descriptions mean different things. AKA, the Fine designation between the two systems are light years apart and are essentially different grades altogether.

On a positive note each system explains that there is more to their designation than a grade. NGC (as an example) has 4 different criteria.

How could they do better? How do you evaluate your coins and others? Which system should we be using for the sticky thread? When I first got into collecting I though Good meant that the coin was genuine Now I am trying figure AG from Fine:)

There is a common language--it is called a photograph.

If one really means "a common language to discuss value/cost" (which is what the US slab grading system is), then that is much different in the context of ancient coins. If you want a US Seated Liberty dollar they is a good chance you want only one. They the question is appeal versus price and both appeal and price are closely tracked by MS-system numbers. In US coins it would be heresy to prefer a MS-53 to a MS-55. There are very many similar coins around so you can buy the MS-53 for $900 if that is the appeal/price balance you want.

In contrast, if you want a DE SARM denarius of Marcus Aurelius (a very historical type) the many factors discussed elsewhere come into play and if you don't have years to wait you may have to settle for a little off-centering or some other detraction because there are not many similar coins around to pick from. Fortunately, my enjoyment of a coin is not tracked closely by the exact same factor as everyone else (for example, I dislike off-centering more than most, but don't mind wear as much as most).

Pros agree that the technical term "grade" refers to wear alone, regardless of original strike or current surfaces (which are factors listed separately by NGC). I use the term "condition" to encompass all relevant factors. There are so many that it is hopeless to try to put them on one scale of worse to better.

I'd bet that a psychology experiment could prove (with eye-movement-tracking) that US collectors presented with a slabbed coin look at and process the MS-number *before* they look at the coin itself. It is almost hard to look at the coin--the grade-number is so prominent and eye-catching. US collectors know the number is more important than the coin, and frequently high-end coins are broken out of slabs and resubmitted to attempt to get a higher grade on the new slab, because the next buyer would buy a new slab's higher grade for a lot more money--even though it is the same coin. Those are perils of a single-scale grading system.

Be glad that your opinion about condition need not agree with some scale dictated by the establishment. You can appreciate what you like without so single "grade" telling you how much you should like the coin.

I suspect a lot of these 'investors' will get a bit of a shock when they come to sell and realise they have overpaid by 400% and the 'grades' on their slabs don't really mean anything to anyone, good enough for them

Getting back to just grading, something I'm still not sure about, is grading purely used as the means to set prices these days?