A New Grading System! -Rick Snow

Rick's system is not a 100 point system. The following is my understanding: His grading system is called PDS Grading System - P: Planchet, D: Die, S: Strike. His system uses ANA grade system of P, AG, G, VG, F, VF, XF, AU, MS, perfect. Each of the PDS would have criteria to rate from 0 to 5. 0 being the worst and 5 the best. The PDS would be added together and a grade would look as follows: G (3-111) AU (8-332) Perfect (15-555).

If the Rick's system was incorporated into the current grading system for a 1921 Peace dollar the grade could look like MS65 (9-45O).

I am sure there will be lots of information to follow, but I wanted to give you a heads up of Rick's Grading System.

Andrew, the PDS grading is an attempt to price coins in the same grade as low end, average or high end. For example, two AU55 coins have the same grade, one coin is low for the grade and the other is high end for the grade. The high end coin with a solid strike and nice eye appeal gets a PDS score of AU55 (10-334) The low end coin with a distracting planchet flaw and poor strike gets a PDS score of AU55 (6-231). The coins have the same technical grade but the coin with the higher PDS score will sell for more money. If I were the Management at ICG or ANACS, I would would have to give a system like this some heavy thought because CAC does not sticker their coins and it might work better for new collectors to have more information about the grading system. NGC or PCGS may give something like this a try as a second attempt to reduce the power of the CAC sticker.

EAC has been doing this for years as scudzy / average / choice and then wear grade for the "technical" grade. A scudzy 35 may be much less attractive than a choice 20, despite technical grades.

As many times as the wheel's been re-invented by people looking to make "the" grading system for coins...I'm not optimistic. It appears to be an attempt to steal a bit of CAC's thunder by coming up with highly subjective metrics of grade analysis and attempting to use those subjective grade judgments to justify premium prices. "It's worth the extra $300 over book because it's got a 5/5 strike!" is not what this hobby needs to be supporting right now -- prices are already a barrier to entry for new collectors.

This is entirely too abstruse for most non-advanced collectors, and nearly impossible to value in a price guide. You might as well split each numeric grade into tenths -- "This is a MS-63.4 coin, so it's not worth as much as this MS-63.9 example."

With CAC already stickering coins that are (allegedly) top end in their assigned grades, why is this even necessary? Gradeflation and market grading are hot issues -- but that horse isn't going back in the barn any time soon. Bottom line is that nowadays a dealer's choice NOT to market grade might make them feel like they are "right" or "better" or "more accurate", but it's financially irresponsible.

As to me, I'll stick to passing judgment on grades with my wallet.

Rick Snow is among the most respected numismatists in the country. That said, I could care less about learning the intricacies of a "new" grading system. My collecting interests have changed many times over the years, eclectic that I am. So, I'm not resistant to change. For those who relish playing another grading game, there will be winners and losers.

From this oldtimer's perspective, I know a bean when I see one, so ... Hold the beans!

Amen.

According to PCGS:




According to NGC:




I wonder how two or three graders reach consensus on a grade for a coin? There is a lot of research in social psychology about the factors involved with consensus judgments, e.g., the influence of a higher status judge (grader) over lower status individuals.

Because Snow has some intentions of creating a better mousetrap as the marketing success of the green bean is obvious. Now, is the success of the green bean itself a worthy cause to copy? Maybe not but its revenue stream is quite promising. The reason I say CAC might not be worth its weight from an authoritative perspective is due to the number of coins I have seen that made me go And the fact that I know of some prominent dealers that can get anything a green bean due to decades long relationships with J.A. So favors being done ruins the integrity of the system.

The rest of Snow's intentions are probably honorable. I mean look at how they grade Ancients. IMO What Snow is proposing is seemingly a hybrid of modern and ancient grading with a sprinkling of CAC inspiration again, due to a proven marketing success story.

I think that with computer AI becoming better every day that in the not terribly far in the future I could see being able to program them to grade coins. I'm not saying it will be easy and it would require a lot of testing, but eventually that could become the best way to standardize things.