I know for sure it is a Poor Mans Double Die. but it also maybe a1955P-1 Do-002 http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/diestate.php?date=1955&die_id=1955p1do002&die_state=mds here is my pictures
It appears that the strongest pick up point (PUP) is Liberty. And, yours does not have the same doubling. By the way, a Poor Man's DD for 1955 is noting more than die erosion. And it is DoubleD Die.
I need to get a better photo of IGWT in black&white you can see the doubling better. yes I know but the one shown is worn mine Gem Bu that may make a difference???
Yep! It is a "poor man's" D/D. They were so common that year it is sometimes al most hard to find a clean strike.
This is not a 55 DDO. What I see here are a well worn set of 1955 dies or possibly marks left by die grease.
I agree, this is a typical looking 1955 struck by extremely worn dies. Also, The 1955 "Poorman's" as they call it is not a doubled die at all. It is merely a coin struck by seriously deteriorated dies. To use the term Poorman's doubled die is going to give folks the wrong impression. Thanks, Bill
I also have to agree very strong die detrioration doubling just anothe poor mans doubled die no notching is indicated and very mushy letters which are not distinct like a real doubled die should look like. I have come across many poor mans doubled dies in circulation. I do keep them because they are sought after by many coin collectors. I also have a doubled die but not the big one. I think mine is the 1955P 1-DO OO3 JC formerly jazzcoins Joe
Yours is a Poor Man's DD. Here's a pic of a 1955 DD, the severe doubling on the date leaves no room for doubt:
Ahh, there is another thread on the same coin. In my opinion as above, this ( Shameless posting, last coin ) is the 1955 DDO die #2, not the typical "poorman's doubled die". There is some late die stage deterioration also that may confuse the issue as to the last "5". The first coin, OP, is a "poorman's". Sorry for the mixup. Jim