1970 S small date penny -- Incorrect listing at Heritage?

I decided to look for some missing keys in my own albums. I found this listing and it's driving me crazy. Isn't this a large date?

https://coins.ha.com/itm/lincoln-ce.../1281-7101.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515

I mean, I'm assuming it's small, both the grading company and Heritage can't be wrong can they?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

As opposed to this one, which is a small date:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/proof-linc...m-Auction-Open-PreviousPricesHeritage-081514#

 

This is 100% a large date.

 

Yes it is a large date.
I copied the photo and blew it up a little.
It's not small. Error on the holder.

 

Well, it just sold for $690... Crazy.

 

It's true that the proof 70-S small dates don't have a weak LIBERTY,
but NONE of the other SD markers are present.

 

Sure there is! The 9 is classic small date, curling toward the 7 and not the S. By the way, this el numero uno diagnostic, not the level tops of the digits. I get REALLY annoyed when people draw that line across the digits. It is NOT a valid diagnostic, and never has been.

BESIDES, and I have written on this before - I DO NOT ACCEPT that there are two varieties, but rather more like 4 to 5. You can (as I have) open ONE ROLL of solid 1970-S cents and find EACH diagnostic alone without any others, and in random combinations.

There ARE level top of digits coins that are LD and coins without level tops that are SD. We REALLY need to STOP using that black line at the top of the digits. IT LIES!

Final point: DO NOT USE CIRCULATION STRIKE DIAGNOSTICS ON THE PROOF VERSION!

"The book" on the 1970-S cents hasn't been written yet. I have close to 50 photos about my findings toward the project. I nominate 1970-S as the least understood variety in all of 1c numismatics.

 

The curl of the 9 points to the foot of the 7 and not across.
The 7 is lower than the 9 and the 0.
It may be different because it's a proof, but it doesn't look like a small date at all.

 

I understand this is a proof, and the markers may be different.
However, what is the point of having a proof 1970-S small date,
if it looks exactly like a large date and nothing like a small date?
The difference between the 2 coins are the notable differences in the dates.
If the proof date looks exactly like a large date, how do you really know it's a small date? Because some monkey in a cubicle looked at it for 10 seconds and labeled it as such?

 

IMO the mint mark is too low for a SD. But as V Kurt Bellman said there seems to be many varieties and it drives me crazy. Who decided there was a SD and a LD anyway?

 

Here is a photo of a proof 1970-S small date.
The 9 has a lot more curl than the coin we are discussing.
And, the 7 is MUCH higher up. Everyone with a large date 1970-S proof should send it in for grading, if the other coin is a SD since it looks exactly like a large date.

 

How much do you think the die state has to do with these variations? That is, the appearance may change as the die becomes more worn?

 

Interesting thought worthy of another look. The real question is how many SD proof dies are there? I know of at least two, but there may be more.

 

This is taken from "The Cent Project" website (http://www.thecentproject.com/sort1970.php). He (Charles D. Daughtrey) believes the infallible diagnostic is the "notch in the crotch" of the 7. I disagree and find this diagnostic difficult to see, especially if the coin is well circulated and worn.

Large date:


Small date:

 

o

 

I have 7 in good shape, maybe I’ll send them all in and hope for the best

 

I never heard that diagnostic before. I have to go back and look. Keep in mind - you’re in business strike land. The OP’s is a proof.

This entire subject is in serious need of a serious academically rigorous book.

Every true SD I have ever held in my hand had the mintmark tucked up close to the date, but I don’t claim that as dispositive.

That’s the problem - no one thing seems dispositive. It’s like a vote.

 

He states that the notch in the crotch diagnostic applies to proofs too.

 

Too good a claim to NOT re-examine. Let's review the alleged diagnostics, shall we?

1) Level top of digits.
2) Upper loop of 9 points higher than the mintmark.
3) Notch in the crotch of the 7.
4) Weak "LIBERTY".

Any more?

 

TPG slab labels! lol