MS Versus Australian Standards

[markn]

The weighting factors for the overall grade is
40% surface preservation
20% strike
20% lustre
20% eye appeal

Correct me if I am wrong but that's how PCGS arrive at their Sheldon grade.  NGC (or ANACS) are different?

[nealeffendi]

At the end of the day the two systems are the same as two rulers

Two rulers, both of which are busted. Maybe one day in the future someone will come up with a system that isn't broken... say a scale of 1-100 for starters, with no detail at all (like on a blank planchet) at the bottom and an absolutely perfect example at 100, and consistency across the entire scale so that any fool could use it properly.

Yeah, right.... wishful thinking I know.

There is no perfect system. Even 1-100 wouldn't do it as if a blank is 0 then how do you grade between choice polished blank (for a proof) and a bent and corroded blank?
My biggest gripe with both systems is that the grading is linear with no allowance for other factors, for example a Gem florin that will grade MS67 but has the tiniest trace of either possible circulation or minor bag marks, so is either rated as MS66 or AU58:dodgy: if the Sheldon system is used; but if the Adjective system is used then many dealers will pass it off to buyers as Gem and hope the dupe doesn't try to slab it

The weighting factors for the overall grade is
40% surface preservation
20% strike
20% lustre
20% eye appeal

for example a Gem florin that will grade MS67 but has the tiniest trace of either possible circulation or minor bag marks

I'm not quite sure what you mena here - bagmarks are taken into account in the overall grade (surface preservation). If the coin has entered circulation there will be at best myriad minute marks due to impact with other coin counter, keys in pockets etc, at worst surface detail will be missing due to wear.

The "If" part is the fulcrum. I purchased (cheaply, under $30) an AU58 slabbed parliament florin with probably only the minimum amount of marks necessary to be called AU, I've also paid 10 times more for a MS64 parliament and the eye appeal and lustre is better on the AU58, there is almost no difference in the minute marks so it wouldn't be that hard for the 2 florins to swap holders. As it can be hard to tell the difference between minute marks from newly minted coins in a wallet and minute marks from newly minted coins in a mint bag how can anyone be certain if a coin should grade AU or aGem based on a few minor marks?

[oh my florin]

The weighting factors for the overall grade is
40% surface preservation
20% strike
20% lustre
20% eye appeal

I could swear it was different from this Surface preservation is much higher judged than 40% I remember watching one of the PCGS grading 101 videos and it had the exact breakdown of it. I'll try find it tomorrow and post the link with it to.

[oh my florin]

Yep thought so found it published by PCGS on Youtube here is the link for it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apn-kYEl-Xw
At 4mins 46secs in it states
For mint state coins the breakdown is
60% surface preservation
15% luster
15% strike
10% eye appeal
I can't find the one showing Circulated coin breakdowns but I think it is
75% surface Preservation
10% eye appeal
15% strike

[trout]

The "If" part is the fulcrum. I purchased (cheaply, under $30) an AU58 slabbed parliament florin with probably only the minimum amount of marks necessary to be called AU, I've also paid 10 times more for a MS64 parliament and the eye appeal and lustre is better on the AU58, there is almost no difference in the minute marks so it wouldn't be that hard for the 2 florins to swap holders. As it can be hard to tell the difference between minute marks from newly minted coins in a wallet and minute marks from newly minted coins in a mint bag how can anyone be certain if a coin should grade AU or aGem based on  a few minor marks?

I may be biased but any Canberra florin has "Eye Appeal " to me
:laugh2:

I do agree that many of the AU58 Canberra's are far more attractive than the  MS61-63 Coins :ok:

[wwwww]

It's extremely unusual for an AU58 to have surfaces similar in quality to an MS64. In the rare cases where it does occur, it is indicative of a coin which was worn through non-circulating means (roll friction, cabinet friction, etc) and the coin will still grade MS though at a lower grade level.

In my experience, PCGS only knocks a coin to an AU grading for non-circulating wear if the surface condition is also impaired (e.g. through light cleaning).

[trout]

It's extremely unusual for an AU58 to have surfaces similar in quality to an MS64. In the rare cases where it does occur, it is indicative of a coin which was worn through non-circulating means (roll friction, cabinet friction, etc) and the coin will still grade MS though at a lower grade level.

In my experience, PCGS only knocks a coin to an AU grading for non-circulating wear if the surface condition is also impaired (e.g. through light cleaning).

I am not saying that a AU58 coin has similar surface conditions to an MS64 coin.
What I am saying tho is many an AU58 coin has superior eye appeal to an MS60-62 coin