Design Evolution: What Came Before and After Rick Snow’s PDS Grading System — A Numismatic Artist’s Perspective on the Future of Coin Evaluation

Coin designs don’t appear out of nowhere — they evolve, sometimes over decades, sometimes in a single brilliant flash of insight. Let me trace the artistic lineage of a piece that has reshaped how many of us think about quality in this hobby.

When I first encountered Rick Snow’s PDS (Planchet-Die-Strike) Grading System during his ANA presentation, I was struck by something far bigger than a grading innovation. What Rick proposed was, at its core, a design philosophy — a genuinely new way of seeing, evaluating, and articulating the artistic merit of a coin. As a numismatic artist who has spent decades studying the relationship between planchet preparation, die state, and striking quality, I consider the PDS system one of the most significant conceptual shifts in how we talk about coin quality since the Sheldon scale was adapted for modern grading. In this piece, I want to trace the artistic and intellectual lineage of Rick’s system — what came before it, what it builds upon, how the collecting public has reacted, and where it may lead us.

The Problem That Sparked a Revolution: Why PDS Was Needed

To appreciate the PDS system, you first have to feel the frustration that birthed it. For decades, collectors have relied on a single numerical grade — MS63, AU58, PR65 — to encapsulate the entire quality story of a coin. But as any serious collector knows, two coins sharing the same grade are emphatically not the same coin.

One MS63 might be a blazing, mark-free example with full cartwheel luster and a razor-sharp strike. Another might be a borderline slider with muted surfaces, weak details, and compromised eye appeal. The Sheldon scale, for all its brilliance, was never engineered to capture these nuances — not in the era of third-party grading and six-figure auction results.

Rick Snow recognized this gap. His insight was deceptively simple: break the single grade into three independent sub-scores — Planchet (the preservation and surface quality of the coin as it exists), Die (the state and condition of the die at the time of striking), and Strike (how completely and sharply the design was impressed into the planchet). Each factor is rated on a 0–5 scale, with 3 representing average, producing a composite score out of 15. A coin rated 5-5-5 is perfection; a coin rated 1-1-1 sits at the lowest end of its assigned grade.

But this approach didn’t emerge in a vacuum. Let me trace its artistic lineage.

Previous Types: The Intellectual Ancestors of PDS

The Sheldon Scale and Its Limitations

The foundation of all modern coin grading traces back to Dr. William Sheldon’s 1949 work, Penny Whimsy, which introduced the 1–70 numerical scale specifically for Early American copper coins. Sheldon’s system was revolutionary for its time, but it was designed as a market grading tool — a way to assign value, not to describe artistic quality in granular detail. When the major grading services (PCGS, NGC) adopted the Sheldon scale in the 1980s, they applied it universally, from Morgan dollars to modern commemoratives. The single-number grade became king, and nearly all nuance was lost in the process.

NGC’s Ancient Coin Grading: A Direct Precursor

Several forum participants pointed out that NGC already employs a strikingly similar system for ancient coins. NGC grades ancients using three factors: Grade (wear), Strike, and Surface. This tripartite approach acknowledges that a coin’s numismatic value and desirability cannot be reduced to a single number. The parallel to Rick’s PDS system is unmistakable.

The key difference is philosophical. NGC’s system was developed for a specific market — ancient coins, where strike and surface preservation vary enormously — while Rick’s PDS system was designed to be universal, applicable to every coin from a worn Large Cent to a gem Buffalo Nickel.

Dealer-Era Quality Descriptions

Before third-party grading became dominant, dealers described coins using rich, qualitative language that conveyed real information. A dealer might call a coin “choice for the grade,” “mark-free with full split bands,” or “lightly toned with exceptional eye appeal.” These descriptions were the informal ancestors of PDS — they communicated what a single number never could.

One forum commenter recalled that dealer Steve Estes used a numbering system applied to different quality factors in the late 1980s and mid-1990s. While it never gained universal acceptance, it demonstrated that the market was already hungry for more granular quality descriptors — for language that could capture what collectors actually saw.

As one collector put it: “All coins with the same grade are not the same, so adding more qualifiers helps to describe the coin better.”

The “Eye Appeal” Movement

In the years leading up to Rick’s ANA presentation, the concept of “eye appeal” had gained enormous traction in the hobby. CAC (Certified Acceptance Corporation) stickers became a de facto secondary grading layer, with CAC-approved coins commanding significant premiums at auction. The market was already voting with its wallet: two MS65 Morgan dollars are not equal if one has superior eye appeal. PDS was, in many ways, the intellectual formalization of what collectors and dealers had been doing instinctively for years — assigning value based on qualities that no single number could express.

The PDS System Itself: Design Continuity and Innovation

How PDS Works: A Three-Dimensional Grade

Let me break down the three components as I understand them from Rick’s presentation and the subsequent forum discussion:

• Planchet (P): This evaluates the preservation and surface quality of the coin after striking. It considers marks, scratches, hairlines, carbon spots, toning quality, patina, and overall surface integrity. A coin with pristine, original surfaces scores a 5; a coin with significant detracting marks scores lower. Rick notably redefined “planchet” to mean the preservation of the coin as it exists — not the quality of the original blank before striking. This redefinition alone represents a significant philosophical shift.
• Die (D): This evaluates the condition of the die at the time of striking. For Mint State coins and Proofs, this considers cartwheel luster (which originates from die flow lines), die state (early die states with deep mirrors versus late die states with degradation), and die deformation. For circulated coins, die state manifests differently — stars bleeding out to the rim on Bust half dollars, for instance, signals die wear.
• Strike (S): This evaluates how completely and sharply the design was impressed into the planchet. Full detail, sharp breast feathers on an Eagle, complete leaf tips on an Indian Head cent — these are the hallmarks of a high strike rating.

A coin graded MS65 with a PDS of 4-4-4 (12/15) is a solid, above-average example. A coin graded MS65 with a PDS of 2-3-2 (7/15) is a low-end piece that may have been generously graded. This distinction is enormous for collectors and investors trying to assess true numismatic value.

The AU58 vs. MS60–62 Argument: PDS as Peacemaker

One of the most heated debates in numismatics is the AU58 versus MS60–62 question. Many collectors have long argued that a choice AU58 — a coin with virtually full luster, sharp detail, and minimal wear — is more desirable and more valuable than a low-end MS60 or MS61 that barely crossed the Mint State threshold. The PDS system resolves this debate elegantly.

An AU58 coin with exceptional PDS ratings (say, 4-4-4 or 12/15) is clearly a superior coin to an MS60 with low PDS ratings (say, 2-2-1 or 5/15). As one forum participant noted: “This really clears up the AU58 vs. MS60-62 argument for quality quite nicely!”

This is where the concept of non-linear grading becomes tangible — the idea that certain AU coins are nicer (and hence worth more) than some lower-graded MS pieces. PDS makes this concept quantifiable, giving collectors a structured way to compare coins across traditional grade boundaries.

Public Reaction: Enthusiasm, Skepticism, and the Long Road to Adoption

The Supporters: Collectors Crying for Nuance

The response from thoughtful collectors was overwhelmingly positive. Many expressed genuine relief at finally having a vocabulary to describe what they had long observed but struggled to articulate:

“Collectors do seem to be crying for an explanation they can grasp as to why there is such variation between auction prices realized for coins of the same grade. They want an explanation beyond the current one which leaves the answer vague — something like ‘it’s high end’ or ‘the upgrade artists went after it.’ And while these things could easily be true about a coin, they don’t really help the collector. This system does.”

Another collector shared: “I already use something similar mentally, covering five points when evaluating TPG coins, tokens, and medals in hand.” This suggests that PDS formalizes an intuitive process that experienced collectors already employ — giving structure to something many of us do instinctively.

One particularly enthusiastic collector declared: “I only collect coins scoring 15. 555 or pass it by!” While that’s an extreme position, it illustrates the aspirational clarity that PDS provides — a concrete target for those chasing the finest examples of any given grade.

The Skeptics: Subjectivity, Complexity, and Grade Inflation Concerns

Not everyone was convinced. Several significant objections emerged from the forum discussion, and they deserve honest consideration:

1. Subjectivity: The most common concern was that PDS grades would be just as subjective as current grades. As one participant noted: “The problem is universal acceptance, as no two hobbyists will glance at a coin and rate it exactly the same.” This is a legitimate concern. If the major TPGs cannot consistently agree on a single grade, how can they agree on three sub-grades?
2. Grade Inflation: One thoughtful critic raised a particularly sharp objection: “How will your system stop gradeflation? It actually seems like it would drive gradeflation and the need for re-submission.” The argument is that under the current system, a coin either makes MS60 or it doesn’t. Under PDS, a coin could be resubmitted multiple times, each time hoping to bump a single sub-score from 3 to 4, creating a slow inflation that costs collectors more in submission fees. Rick’s response was that higher assigned grades would lower the planchet and strike factors naturally — a coin graded MS63 with wear on the high points would receive drastically lower P and D ratings, creating internal consistency.
3. Complexity and Confusion: Several participants expressed confusion about the system, particularly the distinction between Planchet (redefined as post-strike preservation versus pre-strike blank quality) and the overlapping descriptions of die state at different levels. One collector asked: “What is the difference between #3 ‘moderate cartwheel effect’ and #4, ‘some cartwheel effect?'” Rick acknowledged that too many specifics could clutter the initial presentation and that he intended to refine the definitions over time.
4. Over-Engineering: Some felt the system was “a little over the top” and that ultimately, “a buyer needs to look at a coin and make a judgment.” There’s wisdom in that — no system replaces the educated eye.

The Luster Question: Why Not PDSL?

One of the most interesting suggestions came from a participant who asked why luster wasn’t included as a fourth factor — a PDSL system. Luster is arguably the single most important visual quality of a Mint State coin, and its absence from the PDS triad is notable. In my experience as a numismatic artist, luster is the life of a coin — it’s what makes a cartwheel spin, what makes a coin glow, what separates a truly original piece with beautiful patina from a dipped or impaired example. Whether Rick considers luster to be embedded within the Planchet and Die factors, or whether he intentionally excluded it to keep the system manageable, is a question worth exploring in future iterations.

Succeeding Types: Where PDS Fits in the Broader Grading Landscape

The CAC Effect and Market-Based Quality Signals

Since Rick’s presentation, the market has continued to evolve toward quality differentiation. CAC has become a powerful force, and the concept of “stickered premium” is now deeply embedded in auction realizations. More recently, the “four-grade initiative” — a board proposal to add additional descriptive tiers to existing grades — has gained traction. As one forum participant noted: “Seems like it would blend nicely with the ideas this board has come up with as of late — the ‘four-grade’ initiative.”

PDS is not the only attempt to solve the quality-nuance problem, but it is arguably the most systematic and intellectually rigorous. Other approaches tend to be market-driven (CAC stickers) or descriptive (dealer quality calls), while PDS provides a framework — a structured methodology that can be taught, learned, and applied consistently across different series and denominations.

The Auction Record Solution: A Competing Vision

One forum participant offered an elegant alternative: rather than adding sub-grades, improve the pricing guides. What if an online price guide allowed you to click through on any price to the 50 most relevant auction records, complete with images, date of sale, and TPG-assigned grade? The argument is that “the price realized by a coin is the best indicator of its true quality.” This is a compelling vision — a world where the market itself, through transparent auction data, provides the quality differentiation that PDS attempts to provide through sub-scores.

I see these as complementary rather than competing approaches. PDS provides the vocabulary for describing quality; auction data provides the validation of that quality in the marketplace. The ideal future would combine both — structured evaluation language paired with transparent market evidence.

NGC’s Ancient Coin Model: A Working Template

It’s worth reiterating that NGC’s ancient coin grading system — using Grade, Strike, and Surface — has been functioning successfully for years. This proves that multi-factor grading can work in practice, not just in theory. The ancient coin market is no less complex or subjective than the modern coin market, and yet collectors have adapted to the three-factor approach. This bodes well for PDS’s long-term viability and suggests that the market can absorb more sophisticated grading language when it genuinely serves collectors’ interests.

Practical Takeaways for Buyers and Sellers

Whether or not the PDS system achieves universal adoption, there are immediate, actionable lessons that every collector and dealer can apply right now:

• Evaluate coins on three axes, not one. When you examine a coin — whether in hand, in a holder, or in a photograph — consciously assess the planchet quality (marks, toning, surface preservation), the die state (cartwheel luster, die freshness, evidence of die wear), and the strike (completeness of detail, sharpness of design elements). This three-dimensional assessment will make you a better buyer and a more discerning judge of collectibility.
• Use PDS language in your own descriptions. Even if the TPGs never adopt PDS formally, you can use its vocabulary. Describing a coin as “above-average in planchet quality, with strong strike and late die state” communicates far more than “MS63.” It tells a story about the coin’s provenance and condition that a single number never could.
• Be skeptical of single-number grades. As one collector wisely noted: “I will not buy anything slabbed unless it meets what I seek and I feel it can stand on its own, asking price wise, raw without the plastic.” The PDS philosophy reinforces this: the coin is the coin. The label is just an opinion.
• For circulated coins, adjust your expectations. As one astute forum participant pointed out: “For certified circulated coins G04 to VF35, I would think the ‘P’ planchet may weigh heavier in the system, as die strike and die wear may be hidden by wear over time.” On worn coins, the planchet surface becomes the dominant quality factor, while strike and die state become harder to evaluate — an important practical consideration.
• Think in terms of composite scores. Rick’s 0–5 scale per factor, totaling 15, provides a useful mental framework. A coin scoring 12/15 is genuinely above average. A coin scoring 7/15 is below average for its stated grade and may be a candidate for downgrade — or a bargain if priced accordingly.

The Artistic Legacy: Why PDS Matters Beyond Grading

As a numismatic artist, I want to step back from the mechanics of grading and consider the broader artistic significance of what Rick Snow has proposed. Coins are works of art — miniature sculptures created through the interplay of human design (the engraver’s art), mechanical process (the die and press), and material science (the planchet). The traditional grading system reduces this complex artistic process to a single number. PDS restores the artistic dimension by acknowledging that a coin’s beauty and quality are multi-faceted.

When I examine a gem Indian Head cent — say, a 1907 PR65RB of the kind Rick discussed in his presentation — I don’t just see “PR65.” I see the preservation of the original planchet surface, the state of the die that struck it (with its implications for luster and mirror depth), and the completeness of the strike (every feather, every letter, every wreath leaf). These three factors together create the visual experience of the coin. PDS gives us the language to articulate that experience — to move beyond “it looks nice” to a precise, shared vocabulary of quality.

Rick’s redefinition of “planchet” itself is artistically significant. By shifting the meaning from the pre-strike blank to the post-strike preservation, he is saying: what matters is not what the coin was before it was made, but what it is now. This is a profoundly artistic perspective — it values the finished work over the raw material, the realized vision over the blank canvas.

Conclusion: The Collectibility and Historical Importance of PDS

Coming up on a decade since Rick Snow first presented the PDS Grading System at the ANA, the system remains what it has always been: a powerful, intellectually rigorous framework that has not yet achieved universal adoption but continues to influence how serious collectors think about coin quality. Its historical importance lies not in whether it replaces the Sheldon scale, but in how it has expanded the vocabulary of numismatic evaluation.

The PDS system sits at a fascinating intersection of art, science, and market dynamics. As a numismatic artist, I believe its greatest contribution is philosophical: it teaches us to see coins not as single-grade commodities, but as complex, multi-dimensional works of art whose quality — and whose numismatic value — can only be fully appreciated through careful, structured evaluation.

For collectors, the practical takeaway is this: whether or not PDS ever appears on a grading label, the habit of evaluating coins on three independent axes — planchet, die, and strike — will make you a sharper, more discerning collector. You will buy better coins, sell with more descriptive accuracy, and develop a deeper appreciation for the artistry that goes into every piece of metal that passes through a coin press. You’ll also find yourself better equipped to assess eye appeal, spot a rare variety with superior strike, and understand why two coins with identical labels can realize dramatically different prices at auction.

Rick Snow may not have revolutionized the grading industry overnight, but he planted a seed. And in my experience, the best ideas in numismatics — like the best coins — are the ones that improve with age.

Related Resources

You might also find these related articles helpful:

• Design Evolution: What Came Before and After GTG #6 — The 1882-S Morgan Dollar and the Artistic Lineage of America’s Most Iconic Silver Dollar – Coin designs don’t simply appear out of thin air — they evolve, shaped by the hands of engravers, the demands of c…
• Starting a Coin YouTube Channel: How to Turn Die Cracks and Die Varieties Into Viral Content for Collectors – The coin collecting hobby is exploding on social media right now. If you’ve been thinking about turning that passi…
• Can’t Afford the Key Date? The Best Budget Alternatives to Rick Snow’s PDS Grading System – Let’s be honest — most of us don’t have thousands of dollars to drop on a single piece of metal. But that do…