FYI, always helpful to include an image of the entire coin. That way we know the year and overall condition of the coin. First guess though is worn die/die polish doubling.
Sorry .I just wanted an opinion as to the unatural doubling as it is seen without the bias or influence of knowing the date of the coin.I thought it would be irrelevent as the method or of the error would be obvious to the trained eye. Kip
Its not that easy...you see...sometimes it is known that a date has doubling...and sometimes its known to be machine doubling that might look like real doubling...we like to be sure before we type our mind! Nope---a photo is a must with any coin...and that is a photo of both sides. A trained eye is good...but even they mess up... Speedy
There are 3-4 DD for 1983...can you take a photo of that coin?? I think the 1909 is damaged....the reason...for a true DD the part that is double would stand out on the coin...this is almost indented...therefore maybe it is from 2 coins being put side/side and then taking a hammer and a piece of leather.... Speedy
I could accept that.Only if that had happened there would be indent marks on the rim?#yes? where it would lay .This is just an old worn coin I was looking for rpms and saw the doubling of the eyes .they are visible just at x10 not indented.I think its been struck more than twice or maybe on an old die trial blank. Kip
There are 3-4 DD for 1983...can you take a photo of that coin?? Last edited by sirkipalot : Today at 06:48 PM. Reason: heres the 1983 pic look to the
Nope--it would be right where they are...the coins are set on top on one of another... The 1983 look a little bit like a DD but not the ones that the book show...I'm wondering if it could be machine doubling..... Speedy
