I came across this coin in my collection the other day and I found that there was only one in NGC's census of "NGC-recognized varieties" and Wexler's Die Varieties. Both listings were of the same exact coin and no other examples or varieties. My question is, Is this coin rare or just very little interest in it? NGC Attribution: 2009 DDR PROFESSIONAL LIFE VP-001 1C MS https://www.ngccoin.in/variety-plus...ntennial-and-shield-reverse-2009-date/826763/ Wexler's Die Varieties: 2009-P 1¢ PL WDDR-031 https://doubleddie.com/90701.html
Hello! I do not consider it is a Doubled Die strike as a DD tends to affect the whole coin surface in this case the reverse. The part he points,is the doubling effect on the cupola columns and it is off center. I think VV eventually recognized this and that it was mechanical doubling. The "WDDR-031" is not a top ranked coin choice IMO. You can certainly hold it, Not saying its a bad coin, just a few decades ago, the internet was full with sites like you mentioned, all trying to attract new members, so IMO the naming was often mistaken. Jim , Good hunting!!
I would say the answer is very little interest. I appreciate the minutia involved in identifying them and giving them a Wexler number, but there are hundreds of different ones for 2009 on that site. In my view this isn't true hub doubling in the traditional sense anyway. It's more like "hubbing chatter", or the die making version of MD. The mint had long before changed to single press hubbing. Why NGC chose to attribute just this one, or only 8 out of the 101 formative years ones, who knows. A lot of the Variety Plus stuff on NGC is questionable.
You are welcome! Back in early 2000, Several individuals started pushing every small difference in a coin as something special to encourage new coin searching members. If you check major groups such as the Major ones that identify and assure it being a true doubled die or just a loose or worn dies. It was good to have a large number of beginners and some others so advertisement and selling could be performed. And I completely agree with KBBPLL on this.
