Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="19Lyds, post: 2275542, member: 15929"]I disagree since these may very well be "Too Minor to List". Just because Wexler lists it does not mean that CONECA will list it. The same is true with Coppercoins. Each attributing organization has their own numbering system which can drive most folks (like me) crazy! CONECA likes to list not only the fact that a coin is a doubled die but what "Type" of doubled die it is which is evident from their numbering system. Ref: <a href="http://www.varietyvista.com/Doubled%20Die%20Numbering%20System.htm" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.varietyvista.com/Doubled%20Die%20Numbering%20System.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.varietyvista.com/Doubled Die Numbering System.htm</a> If the doubling "type" is difficult to distinguish or if the direction of the doubling is difficult to distinguish or if the doubling itself is difficult to distinguish then the coin gets a "Too Minor to List" designation. I have quite a few of them. Wexler and Coppercoins, on the other hand, are not so stringent with their attribution standards. If they see doubling, then it gets a sequential number along with a description of where they see the doubling. There are literally thousands of minor doubled dies by the strict definition of what constitutes a "doubled" die given the manufacturing techniques employed in the past and employed today. Some attributers feel an obligation to list everything while others feel an obligation to list only those that can be accurately defined by what "created" the observed doubling. It's certainly not an attempt to discredit any of the minor doubled dies as much as it is an attempt and making sense out of the mayhem which exists in the die manufacturing process.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches