ah, the S-76b! I think that was one of my first early date large cents too. You example, granted, is in lower grade, but it is all there and I like it too. All early copper is interesting and appealing.
Yep-yep-yep. Nice coin. I have a S-76B also - at least I think, I might validate the attribution later on.
To each his/her own. I don't like damaged (corroded) coins. The only thing that is important is that you enjoy owning it.
Sure you do - http://www.cointalk.com/t61658/. Granted this rarer and has fewer problems, but it is still a problem coin.
Good investigatory skills, but erroneous conclusion. The Eliasberg/Clapp piece now resides in a PCGS "no problem" graded (G04) holder with the provenance. To compare my Clapp with that cap is pure folly. The owner likes the coin, as I do mine, so that is all that matters.
Agreed--everything is relative. Moreover, one man's trash is another's treasure. I have a "junk box" full of coins that many would covet--I give 'em to youngsters and hope to create a few numismatists in the process.
While I'm happy that you have this nice coin, just don't forget to check the 'third' side of the coin for edge lettering and in this case coin weight. I have both the 76a and 76b and they are both marvelous. Enjoy your coin. It is a piece of history and could have been handled by the founders themselves.
So - being in a slab means "no problem"??? Is this from the same mbt that has started threads on TPG's problems and issues? Aren't you the same mbt that cracked out a coin had it come back as not genuine and wanted to complain about the tpg's? Everybody who collects knows that the rarer the coin the more likely a tpg is to slab a problem coin and grade it higher like all key dates(and you could probably slap a cac sticker on them). And its even worse when it comes to the famous collections - like the NGC Reiver collection and evidently the Eliasberg/Clapp collections. There are not any bad Large Cents - just some are nicer than others. And if you do a variety type collection there is probably not a way to complete a problem free collection. Well maybe if you are a millionaire. I enjoy them all in the various shapes, grades, colors and conditions.
As many know, the TPGs have a tough time handling early copper, as most of it does indeed have problems which would disqualify a modern coin. The 1796 1/2c in question is a classic example. Is it a "problem" coin ? The fact that it resides in a "no problem" holder is not the final arbiter; each individual must draw their own conclusion. Clearly, the coin has significant porosity. IMHO, most early coppers with that much corrosion do not get "no problem" holders. Since the 1796 1/2c is a classic rarity, my opinion is this one got the benefit of the doubt - the "classic rarity" curve.
How so? They are both problem coins (corrosion), only one was owned by a famous collector and the other was not.
