Q. David Bowers
"How can the ANA Grading Guide help this situation? Obviously, an expert going over one coin may readily refer to the guide and pin down the precise grade for that coin. Doing the same thing for a handful of coins is reasonable, although time consuming.
"Checking each coin against the guide would be a must if a catalogue were being prepared or for a price list of some kind of an offering in which each coin is being represented as being of a certain quality. This condition did not exist in this study and represents a weakness in the study. Because of this weakness, I would not want to have any ominous conclusions drawn.
"One of the experts participating in this study suggested that the highest and lowest grades be eliminated in each instance. This procedure is frequently followed when averages are sought. I considered doing this and actually studied the charts with that in mind. If this is done the picture is entirely different.
"For example, in one group of coins the score ran 10 exact, 11 with a five point spread, 14 with a 10 point spread and three with more than a 10 point variation. Eliminating the highest and lowest changed the picture radically. The exact grading went from 10 to 27, the five point spread from 11 to 13, the 10 point spread from 14 down to one, and the more than 10 point variation was eliminated all together.
"Under this system we are all but certain to have any given coin graded within five points. Perhaps the answer is to have a coin graded by six experts, drop the highest and lowest grades, and we will have unanimity. At any rate, I could not pass up the opportunity to make the comparative study."
Beginning in 1978, the Official ANA Grading Standards for United States Coins came into general use. Within a few years, dealers everywhere were proclaiming their intentions to grade by ANA standards.
The grading controversy did not end, and opinions continued to fill the pages of Numismatic News, Coin World, The Coin Dealer Newsletter, and other periodicals. Although grading was more objective than ever before, still there was a good deal of subjectivity. The beauty of a coin, its grade, and its apparent value was often in the eye of the beholder, and it was often the instance that several experts could not precisely agree.
Part of the problem lay with different interpretations of the ANA standards. For example, for a Liberty seated quarter of the 1838-1891 type, an MS-65 coin was described as follows:
"Uncirculated, choice: No trace of wear; nearly as perfect as MS-70 except for some small blemish. Has full mint lustre but may be unevenly toned or lightly fingermarked. A few barely noticeable nicks or marks may be present."
A diminutive three-cent silver piece from the 1851-1873 years was given a similar description which included the note that "a few barely noticeable nicks or marks may be present," while a large and heavy double eagle of the 1850-1907 Liberty head type in MS-65 grade could also have a "few minute bagmarks and surface abrasions."
It was argued with some logic that a few marks or abrasions on a large diameter coin would be less serious than would the same number of marks or abrasions on a tiny three-cent silver piece. In fact, the three-cent silver piece might be quite undesirable, whereas the double eagle might appear to be virtually blemish-free, for the marks could be more widely scattered.
While the Official ANA Grading Standards for United States Coins clearly stated that grading was determined by marks or wear received by a coin and had nothing to do with striking characteristics, the quality of the planchet, toning, or other considerations, critics of the ANA proposal stated that this was wrong. In order to be MS-65, one publication stated, a piece must be sharply struck-a contradiction to the ANA view.
Complicating matters was the later establishment of the American Numismatic Association Grading Service. Far from being the arbitration or consultancy panel that Abe Kosoff envisioned, by the mid-1980s the ANA Grading Service was firmly established at ANA headquarters, had nearly two dozen employees on its staff, and was taking in over a million dollars per year in revenues. Heritage, a privately-owned Texas coin firm, set up its own commercial grading service, and the service offered by the International Numismatic Society attracted still other patrons, as did efforts by Kohinoor and a few others. In July 1985 it was announced that two more grading services were being established. One collector commented: "I sent a coin to two different grading organizations, and each gave me a different grade! I am now more confused than ever."
In the meantime, market values continued to rise, and for some series an MS-65 coin was apt to be worth 10 or 20 times the price of an MS-60 or an AU-55 example.
Many customers, particularly new collectors and investors, felt that dealers should somehow or other be able to grade precisely, on a scientific basis, and without contradiction. However, that proved impossible. Indeed, the service set up by Heritage in 1984 was careful to note that within its own organization even lithe same expert may not grade the same coin with the same grade at two different times."
Grading expectations and grading realizations continued to be as controversial in the mid-1980s as they were earlier, but this time around most of the controversy centered on the Uncirculated and Proof areas. Few people had anything to say about Fine, Very Fine, and other lesser grades.
John Jay Ford, Jr., the Rockville Centre, New York numismatist, went down in history as the recipient of the first Founders' Award presented by the Professional Numismatists Guild. This award was set up by Abe Kosoff to honor those making outstanding contributions toward the betterment of the hobby. Presentation of the initial award was made by Abe himself at the PNG banquet immediately preceding the American Numismatic Association convention banquet in Boston in August 1973.
The following month, September, saw Abe Kosoff attending the yearly congress of the International Association of Professional Numismatists. While there he delivered a paper on the subject of American territorial gold coins, one of his favorite series. The 20-minute time allowance made it impossible to be detailed, so he covered the history in brief form. The talk was well received and was later reprinted in Coin World. At the same event, the International Association of Professional Numismatists awarded a gold medal of honor to Abe Kosoff for outstanding service to numismatics. A similar medal went to Donald Crowther of London. These presentations went only the sixth and seventh times that members were so honored in the 22-year history of the IAPN.