Thought this might be fun for the beginner or intermediate collector of varieties. This should be educational, and you should take it as such. It's not meant to belittle you if you don't answer correctly on all or any of them. Hopefully it will help you to learn to better distinguish doubled dies. Which of the following auctions feature doubled dies, and which auctions incorrectly describe worthless other forms of doubling? 1. 1917-D Buffalo 2. 1995 Lincoln 3. 1974 Lincoln 4. 1934-D Mercury 5. 2011 Lincoln 6. 1951 Lincoln 7. 1972 Kennedy 8. 1964-D Washington 9. 1941 Lincoln 10. 1998 Washington I'll post the correct answers Thursday, 06 June at 8 p.m. EDT.
I guess I'll give it a shot. I can always use a little quiz. 1) no 2) yes 3) no 4) no 5) yes (slight class IX on LIBERTY, MD on the date?) 6) yes 7) no 8) yes 9) yes 10) no not sure about some of these, hopefully I get most of them right.
1. 1917-D Buffalo No; unless there's a newly discovered die, there is no documented 1917-D doubled "Liberty" that I know of. 2. 1995 Lincoln Yes; assuming that isn't somehow faked, this would actually get a premium due to the obviousness of the doubling. 3. 1974 Lincoln No; looks like shelving. 4. 1934-D Mercury No; this looks tooled. 5. 2006 Lincoln No; looks like shelving, but maybe that's just from the poor pictures. 6. 1951 Lincoln No; looks tooled. 7. 1972 Kennedy No; looks like shelving. 8. 1964-D Washington Yes; so pretty! 9. 1941 Lincoln Maybe; assuming it's not just circulation wear causing the "smooshed" look to it, then yes. 10. 1998 Washington No; shelving again. I suspect I have ALL the penny ones wrong, since I don't collect pennies.
1. No 2. Yes 3. No 4. No 5. Yes - but I don't think WDDO-005 is a best of variety 6. Yes 7. No 8. ? - from the images - looks shelf-like to me. 9. Yes 10. No
I would say no to all, even though a couple are known varieties. I hate any form of doubling that has to be magnified 10X to see.. whether it be genuine, mechanical or manipulated.
1. No 2. Yes 3. No 4. No 5. No also note the description and the coin pictured are different coins. Script says 2006, coin is a 2011. 6. No 7. No 8. Yes 9. Yes 10. No
without looking anything up I would say #2,8 yes and the rest no. after looking up the pennies the 41 looks like it might have the marker on the side of the 9 the 51 maybe hard to tell with the wear. I almost would say the 2011, but itdos not match the wexler photos, looking at the 0 in the date the unbroken 0 (or top one) is on the opposite side as in the picture... Overall I find that almost every one of these lacks the picture qualty I would expect if I was buying online, also one of the first things I was told when new and at my first coin shop was if you are going to buy varieties or expensive coins always check to make sure the die markers are there, if you cant verify those it is a fake.
Sorry for the delayed response. It's been a long night. Ok. The answers: 1. No. Mechanical doubling from a shifting die during the strike. And some poor sap paid over $16 for it. 2. Yes. One of the strongest Class V doubled dies in the series(or any series for that matter). It's also a very affordable example due to the number of coins struck by this die. 3. No. Again, MD. One clue is that it also shows on the mint mark. On pre 1990 Cents, the mint marks were added after the hubbing of the die, so the mint marks were unaffected by any doubling that happened to the die. 4. No. Another strong example of MD. 5. Yes. A classic example of the type of Class IV + Class VIII doubling that we are seeing on the modern single squeeze die hubbings. 6. Yes. Another Class V, but much more subtle than what we see on the 1995 listed above. On this circulated example, the doubling is best seen as notches on the G in GOD and the U of TRUST. 7. No. Once again, the Doctor is in the house. MD. MD that shows on the face confuses a lot of people. 8. Yes. An example of Class II doubling. This type of doubling can be confusing because it can appear almost shelf-like. Look for the subtle separation though and the fact that it adds to the normal thickness of the devices. 9. Yes. Class VI distended hub doubling. This is another one that can be tricky. Although this example shows up as very strong extra-thickness on the tail of the 9 in the date, Class VI extra thickness is often much less obvious. Circulated coins can often show devices that appear extra thick from circulation wear and from damage. This can fool a lot of people into thinking they have a Class VI doubled die. Look for sharp devices that don't appear flattened or "mushroomed". 10. No. This is die deterioration doubling which can occur as a die ages. Unlike MD which cuts into the devices, deterioration doubling will appear as a ghostly shadowing of the devices. Thanks to everyone who participated. Hopefully it was educational and hopefully no one here was the unlucky bidder on any of the worthless examples. I'll address a couple of the comments that were made sometime tomorrow.
I saw this post too late to participate but it was still great fun. :thumb: Thank you jallengomez for the educational entertainment this afternoon.
Die markers can be used to help match up a variety to a certain stage of the die's life, but keep in mind that the true pick-up points, and the validation is the doubled die itself. Die markers are not a fixed property of the die. They come and go over the life of the die and can be influenced by polishing, clashing of the dies, deterioration of the dies, and/or damage. Take for instance the 1955 doubled die. For years, we only knew of the stage A markers and a few years ago someone found a stage B specimen. You can see in the following link just how drastic the die markers are between the two stages. Keep in mind that some varieties make it the entire life of the die without being pulled from production, and those can go through several stages of markers. http://www.doubleddie.com/302101.html There are some coins that I would not purchase without good photos, but if you know how to tell true varieties from the worthless stuff, sometimes poor pictures can be to your advantage. I've cherry-picked several nice varieties off of Ebay when the seller didn't even know they had a variety and the photos were poor enough that it wasn't obvious.
True, gouges and scratches develop over time or fade with wear. There is no substitution for experience and training(assuming the trainer and learner are not idiots.. met a couple that would be better off with dumb luck, lol). When we were talking about markers that day he was showing me a book for verifying high dollar coins, like the 3 legged buffalo and other commonly counterfitted coins. The reason I need good photos is because I dont have either the training or experience, just a mean squint from staring into a loop or pocket microscope too long, lol. I am sure I have tossed some worn doubled LWCs into the no pile, but what I dont know wont hurt me(unless someone finds it and tells me they make 20k off a reject that happened to be some super rare ...exc..). So I have to match up the images .. of course when buying from places like ebay knowing feedbackeese really helps, that and asking any questions you may have before buying and not after.
