Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;john65999, post: 8004390, member: 111931&quot;]i do not have a problem with anybody on here..like i said i am learning, i never collected errors back in the 70&#039;s, heck back then those coins were in junk bins and sold as bloopers or scrapped, lol..they fascinate me and i like to collect them, show them to others who also might enjoy to see them, as i enjoy other&#039;s posts..grading is an opinion, ask pcgs for a grade, pop it out send it in again, another grade, humans perceive things in different ways from one another, i agreed that the coin is not a 68, but it sureluy is not an au-59, or a 64, look at the comparison pics i posted from pcgs own site??, and there is doubling on the coin, i never said it was die doubling, there are many types of doubling, i did not even ask to classify it, if someone wants to correct it and say machine, or die deterioration, fine, but no need to jump alll over me for it, that is all i am saying, this is supposed to be a fun place, as wella s a place to learn....i have learned quite alot the past year from paddy and mr weinberg,, sometimes i will ask if i do not know, but in this case i did not, nor did i state doubled die...and doubled die is not an error anyways but a variety, like die cracks, but they are lumped nder errrors and even in their listings (coin help you and others list strike doubling as one of a kind of error, although not a major one, but some people like them and they are errors, they are leaving the mint in a way not intended to be...and i am not the only one that finds them interesting....i am not forcing anyone to like them,,,just pointing out the fact that it was doubled, i figured it was not a valuable contribution, but i, myself like the coin for that..i bought it for the die cracks and the high grade...[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in