Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Paddy54, Dec 5, 2017.
who told you to find the one without clashes? Did I tell you to find a clashless 61?
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
Incredible work my friend.
If there is a question that Proof dies were used for Business Strikes, they won't be designating this one as a circulated Proof.
There's is no question retired dies were used to mint, mint state coins ,there's a record that they were.
So if what you're saying is correct....then it would only be given an MS designation.
At least we do have proof of a proof die marrage to an MS mintage. Plus a variety too.
Which to me in fact is still a huge find since they are such a perfect match.
And again opening a door for other series to have the same sort of situation going on where retired dies on low mintages placed back in service to hammer out mint state coins for commerce.
@Paddy54. Very impressive and super interesting. Hats off to you, for seeing it and pursuing it.
No. If that is the case, of course it is not a proof coin. But will they label it that proof dies were used?
No. Well, at least, I've never seen a coin labeled as such before. ANACS is the only TPG that may do that.
then you can only know by the appearance of the coin/ and your own knowledge.
Which is what being a numismatist is all about.
Nope. That's "die poop" level frippery; Proof dies were repurposed for Business Strikes with great regularity in US coinage and it's difficult to imagine a justification for that status being some sort of "standout" feature when it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a couple hundred thousand examples just like it.
That leads to another problem: that of determining between actual Proof strikes and early Business Strikes from Proof dies. It's problematic, because there will be zero differing die features. Mirrors help; aside Morgans there are few "DMPL" Business Strikes in US coinage (although there are some). But for Proofs known to have more matte surfaces, or fields hidden under color, the decision is almost purely subjective and there's no doubt in my mind that Proof-struck coins exist in Business Strike slabs and vice-versa.
For all members here ,and collectors everywhere.
To realize that there are anomalies in our hobby both known and unknown.
One must realize that the makers of these disc that we so prize had no idea that decades, centuries, after they left a mark on these disc would be of more value then face.
No idea that any mistakes made by accident or deliberately done make for such a prize to find.
To all collectors young and old alike.... the answers are there when you find something different. Research is your friend...Sometimes the answers come easy sometimes not.
Sometimes they are a mouse click away, others days digging in books.
This hobby offers so much more then filling holes in an album. It affords you the knowledge of so many things, math , science,history.
All shared by others ,or self taught because ...."You" wish to find out the reason ,or the reason's why?
Enjoy the ride......
Dave I agree with about 98% of the above however in this case we are talking under a total of 500,000 coins minted combined 498,000 to be exact divided by 16 known die pairs leaves an average total of 31,125 +/- depending on which die pair was used and the real number of strikes it was used. Factor in the survivel rate on a coin this small.
Again the purpose of this thread is Awareness and education as to the possibilities .
Oh, I understand; I was speaking more of generalities than known issue-specific data. The point being, a coin struck by a former Proof die is no more or less common than that struck by any other die, and it's my considered opinion that such a provenance shouldn't be construed to add value to the coin.
Then again, there are untold thousands of 1909-S VDB's kicking around, and that hasn't stopped them from becoming expensive indeed.
Their values are decreasing and returning to reality.
If a die state/stage develops after it's use as a proof while being used as a business strike, then it would be possible to make a distinction based on die state/stage alone. That would only leave a question on the die state/stage when it's use changed.
Then you have the question were all 16 die pairs used, or just made? They often made dies that were never used just to make sure they had dies on hand if they needed them.
Just the point that proof dies were used to mint this date , your statement isn't to hard to believe. There very well could of been dies never used in 61 but reworked for other years.
Separate names with a comma.