Over date?

I have this 1960 cent. I know there has been claim of a large 0 over small 0 and Breen assigned it a number. Edit really wonder if there truly is such. This one has something going on there, almost appears doubled. Also it appears Lincoln is doubled on the reverse, having two heads, but that may actually be a clash. If it didn't have what appears to be doubled columns, I would say clash. What are your opinions?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

What do you mean by this and what does it have to do with coins? Just wondering
Sounds personal.

 

US & World History is riddled with perverts, world leaders, religious leaders, pop culture icons, virtually every sector of history including Numismatic History.

Personally I feel I can learn something from everyone, I do not have to agree with or practice their beliefs or rituals to learn.

 

There are three Cherrypicker varieties of both small over large and large over small date hubbings. However, all three are proofs which your coin isn't.
As to the double head on the reverse, that couldn't be a clash. Probably MD but hard to tell from your pics.

 

Wow, was that directed towards Walter Breen? What does his personal life have to do with his knowledge of coins? Not that I agree with what he was accused of, but totally irrelevant in this forum.

 

I know the ones listed are proofs, but this resembles those.

 

A few better pictures. The bust is also doubled to the east.

 

Here are some photos of a 1960 TDO for you to compare to.

 

Thanks. I stole these from Wexler.
-001 -002 -003
It looks an awful lot like -001

 

No opinions?