I'm still trying to attribute a G-4 1809 Bust half for a crummy $7 fee. You can see I'm taking a break to start a few threads. I've eliminated many of the 15 choices in Overton yet cannot pin this one down. Some professional authenticators believe you should give up attributing any coin after five minutes. I'm stubborn and refuse to believe I have an unknown variety. Don't ask for images, the coin is too worn and discolored to be any help and I'm not taking shots of the individual pick up points. So, out of curiosity, what's the longest time you have spent identifying one of your coins? Have you ever given up? On occasion in the distant past I have but the coins were even worse than this one.
The longest was about 3 hours per night for nearly 2 weeks. A 1921 (Philly) Morgan Dollar, one of the most difficult VAM's to nail down
I've spent over an hour attributing a reeded edge half that was in solid AU condition. That series is SOOOOO frustrating. But the only times I've ever given up is when the available documentation was simply unavailable or when the coin was just too gone to even make an educated guess. But the bust half dollars are about as well documented as any series on the planet. You can get it, I have faith in you. Go outside and do a primal scream and put your eyeball back to the scope.
If I have the books and online resources required then I don’t stop. I think the most time I spent attributing a coin was about 2-3 hours - it was an 1809 bust half, too. It was in an old PCGS holder which covered the edge of the coin. Eventually I figured it’s the O-102a which may or may not have the XXX edge.
Yup, if the coin is too well worn in the areas commonly used to attribute that design, you become the new pioneer, mapping out those areas of the forest that hadn't yet been bushwhacked. Lots of luck.
Got a toasted Draped Bust Large Cent for free about a year ago. I could see the first two date digits were 17 and it was a Style 2 hair, but after a while trying to make sense of it I gave up. Pulled it out again a couple weeks ago, realized the last A in AMERICA was visible and the position in relation to the stem end and ribbon end was fairly unique, so I figured out it is a 1798 S-168.
Found it O-111! Probably took well over 2 hours and had all the books and the internet. Longest I've ever spent in fifty years on a Bust half. Now I'm going home for the night. I learned one new thing to use that I've never done. The level of the 7th star to the "L" in "Liberty." This poor coin was worn flat.
Got it 4 years ago and still working on it off and on. I call it my half NC because I can't convince myself it's not NC-2 and can't argue with those who say it's not. Nobody can find a reason for saying it's not, but can't say it is. I'm going by the weakest of arguments about date thickness as well as position.
Now you've gone and done it. Back on the trail again. I'll move it back to the Attribute This thread. Congratulations on the O-111 attribution. If they were all easy, attribution would be boring.
Longest? On one Bust half, one of the tough years, 1834 or 1836 about 2 hours. I hate those years, tough to ID
I don't know how the Early Copper Colonial and Cent guys do it. I've given up on many of them and had to use a generic label.
It is not economical to attribute the borderline copper as a business. It's like buying a lottery ticket. It's not good business after accounting for costs of time researching these items. It is worth the time for nicer examples where the points are sharper and shouldn't take as long. So you have the chosen few hobbyists that take the time to research the minutia on the lower grade and problem coins like myself. Not for profit, but because it's challenging. It's the same reason some people study chess.
Pre-1814 coins are easy compared to late date large cents. For those you usually have to go by date position only. Same with Seated coinage, which has extensive variety logging for all denominations.
The reverse of 99 HUB attempts make the last half of 98 through 1800 challenging, but for the most part, you are correct.