This one is a fairly scarce over date. That is the numeral 2 was punched over the 1 in the date (actually the entire coin was repunched, using that term for simplicity, someone with more time will correct me).
@Treashunt Is that dirt on it? Maybe a quick dip would have helped it. All the same, it's a nice one. Did you get it at the ANA? Chris
Actually it looks a lot better in hand as Franks pic makes the toning look darker that it really is , nice luster on her too . Since I've seen the coin I won't play .
Nope, an oldie, in fact I got 08/10/1997. Just checked the records. Not dirt, toning. ask Rusty Nope, no environmental damage Yeah, since your guess would be dead on. Unless you forgot, like I would have.
I "trade" that type of coin through-out the country with a minimum guaranteed grade meeting published A.N.A. Technical standards. I have a half-bag waiting for dealer collection currently where all coins are minimally in that F-12 technical condition. F-12 Reverse is defined: Vertical lines are visible but lack sharpness. Diagonal bands show on Fasces, but one is worn smooth at midpoint. VF-20 Reverse is defined: Wear shows on the two diagonal bands, but most details are visible. ALL VERTICAL LINES ARE SHARP. The posted image may be poor, but I suspect that regardless of image quality, the VF-20 A.N.A. published technical standard could not be met. I will agree that the coin may receive a Almost Uncirculated grade, as I've seen PCGS grade believed lesser quality coins with that grading disparity. JMHO