Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 979258, member: 112&quot;]No idea as I have not been trying to keep track of them in regard to quality of strike. Something worth mentioning though - you have been claiming that the marks on the O with these coins are always planchet marks. But would it not make more sense that any planchet marks on the reverse would be 1 of 2 places - either at the rev high point which is the wheats, or on the spot that is opposite the obv high point which is the N in CENT.</p><p><br /></p><p>That is but one more reason to think that marks on the O are contact marks and not planchet marks.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>No, it isn&#039;t an always assumption that they are contact marks. As has been agreed - planchet marks and contact marks have a different look. But for the sake of argument let&#039;s say both were assumtions. By that reckoning at least 50% of them would have to be contact marks and thus 50% of those coins are over-graded.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Now you contradict yourself Mike. You said earlier in this same post that this coin was the strongest struck of all you have seen posted - and then you say it is weakly struck ? It can&#039;t be both.[/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