Chris just messing with your buddy. The fracture is there but it's hard to see, and photographing it's even harder. So I guess I'll have to show you it's big brother, he's not that hard to make out.PS. This one will soon be on cuds on coins.
Thank you for your reply. The second coin only shows me what a couple of thousand more coin strikes will do to an already stressed die.
I did not even catch that it was 2 different coins. First coin is just a crack, second coin the crack completes the cud.
Correct two different coins, same dates and mint marks. On the first coin displayed you can see the visual crack starting at about 10 o'clock on the rim. Running up through the wing, from the wing to the other rim is what I referred to as a fracture crack. Unfortunately unable to take good photos of it do not have the right equipment. You know the old saying, I appeal is everything. They are both retained cuds but one is better looking than the other.
Second coin does have the rim to rim crack. Still not seeing a retained cud, just a die crack. I have to see vertical displacement (up or down) before I'll agree on a retained cud. A cud requires that the piece has broken off the die. If the pieces falls away you have a full cud. If it is still there (typically held in place by the collar) a retained cud. But without vertical displacement you can't tell if the piece has broken off the die or if it is still attached. A rim to rim die crack doesn't cut it. Even a wide crack with lateral displacement doesn't cut it because the piece may still be attached. No vertical displacement, no cud.
Perfect and 100% correct answer. I have said this forever.. just because there is a crack on the die from rim to rim does not mean that there is a 100% chance that there will be a cud. Possible yes.. but until I see lateral displacement, its a die crack and nothing more. Great Job explaining this Conder.
