That stinks,

I often see dates in the registry where there are massive score corrections to multiple sets and the corrections are typically reductions in points to most if not all coins in the sets. At least the sets that I've noticed corrections in. I'm not sure what triggers the corrections or what determines when the corrections are carried out but they seem to normally be punitive in nature, although it does look like there were a few corrections to the positive side on a few of the coins. All coins in all affected sets received the same deductions or increases based on the score given to that coins grade, it just sucks that the deductions and increases fell in such a way that rankings were changed in the sets.

It doesn't sound like you've gotten an answer as to why the corrections were made, if/when you do please pass it on as I would be curious to learn why the corrections were made as well. Was it a population increase, market value, opinion etc. Sorry about you luck, we've all been there. It's definitely a tough pill to swallow so close to the cut off.

Mike

How did you get that screen with all the "corrected" scores?  I have seen my scores vary but couldn't figure out what coins changed or why. It is most annoying. Best of luck in getting an explanation.

17 minutes ago, rons said:

How did you get that screen with all the "corrected" scores?  I have seen my scores vary but couldn't figure out what coins changed or why. It is most annoying. Best of luck in getting an explanation.

If you look at the set page you should be able to find a tab that says "History," that lists all events that changed the score since you made the set.

3 hours ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

 I'm not sure what triggers the corrections or what determines when the corrections are carried out 

Sometimes NGC will review a set's scoring and change the scores on their own / because they feel it's needed, but, in my experience, most of the time it happens when someone requests a score change. Sometimes you request a score change on one slot and they just adjust that slot. Sometimes you ask for one small change and they take it upon themselves to make broad changes to multiple slots / coins / notes.

3 hours ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

but they seem to normally be punitive in nature

The simple fact that a change / update makes your score goes down doesn't make it "punitive" - I don't believe anyone is trying to punish you, the OP, or the people that compete in that category. For that to even be possible, you'd have to be able to identify a reason / something they're being punished for. The changes are geared towards making the competition and the rankings more fair and accurate -  but that's always subjective.

There have been plenty of times when I have asked for scores to be adjusted when I thought they were out of line. It seems like, more often than not, my lead / position in the category usually gets  worse when I make these requests. That's just life. I remember with my Zimbabwe set I had to go back and forth with them a few times over a few months before they finally identified the problems in their code and got the point values set up in a way that had the scores and rankings make sense. Sometimes you just have to be patient, communicate with them and work with them (NGC).

Just my 2 cents anyway.

I too have had 'slot score reduced' and I didn't understand the rationale behind this but as all collections in the same 'set' were effected equally then nothing was really lost. I have also had 'slot score increased' but to a lesser extent!

NGC obviously has a system for assigning scores and I have given up trying to work out what it is, it only loosely appears to be related to value or rarity within any one set and certainly bears no correlation at all between different sets, even from the same country. It used to bother me that larger, much more common coins scored more points than the often much rarer, and even more expensive, smaller denominations but for me the 'total points' value is meanlingless as the top World Collections are worth $millions so remain something to aspire to should I ever win the lottery. If World coin collectors are after 'total points' then they are probably best collecting the largest denomination gold they can, even modern bullion - for me the lifetime challenge of assembling impossible sets of smaller world denominations is much more interesting - but then most people think I am mad!

I have had this happen to two of my primary collections.  The first time was in October 2017 when the entire U.S. Philippine series underwent a point score adjustment.  My USPI Complete set lost 31,951 over the course of several days.  The second time was in April 2019 when all of the Cuban coin scores were adjusted resulting in a net loss of 9,439 points.

I don't recall now whether I lost or gained standing as a result of these adjustments, but I do recall that the scores for coins graded below MS60 tended to rise whereas the scores for coins graded MS60 and higher tended to decrease, with the highest grades suffering the largest reductions.  Virtually all collections had their total score reduced, but the sets with the highest graded coins suffered the largest decreases, so I can easily see how one could lose a position or two in set ranking.

I have had a number of coins which were the finest known at the time they were graded only to lose that distinction as the certified population grew, so I understand the need for such adjustments over time. What I don't understand is how this causes a rise in the scores for the lower graded coins.

I am sure the points reduction is based on an overall grading evaluation. When they are new and grading population is low there are some extremely high points but as more hit the fan the points seem to blow away. 

It is what it is.

I am under the understanding that the points are correlated to the price, someone please correct me if that is not so.  But is so then there must have been a recent or perhaps a long downward price movement that was not caught and corrected in one mass reduction.

On 9/16/2019 at 9:51 PM, Coinbuf said:

I am under the understanding that the points are correlated to the price, someone please correct me if that is not so.  But is so then there must have been a recent or perhaps a long downward price movement that was not caught and corrected in one mass reduction.

I think price is a factor (and this belief is supported by the fact that they always ask about reciepts / bill of sale on recent sales / purchases if I have them whenever I request changes) but there are a number of things that go into it. I find in many cases that ultra rare and valuable coins get handicapped so that owning 1 or 2 coins is less likely to give you the win in the category rankings and common coins also get buffed - also to help foster participation I think.

I'm one that has nothing to worry about. I'm in the non competitive section.