Stop the press!

I already ate them


stainless

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Give'em back! :goof:

Ribbit

 

Since the only argument anyone can come up with that mine is not a 37.4, is that stupid squished fleuron, here is the pic you MUST use to compare it against (the obverse of the other 37.4-RR):






Once you use the RIGHT pic, the fleurons looks correct! :goof: Plus, like you said, it can't be a ff.1 because the double fleurons on the reverse are facing differently so it is a RR reverse and there are only two known marriages for the RR reverse, a 37.4 & 37.10, and it is WITHOUT A DOUBT not a 37.10, so if peeps want to continue harping on the fleuron, that it's wrong, when it is damaged, then let's start talking a whole new variety (R-9) and then my coin is a $100,000 coin.

Ribbit

 

- - - - EDIT - - - -

There's more going on here. I wish I had it still in hand so I could look at something. I'm wondering if the die was re-worked?

Ribbit

 

That's why I said I still wasn't convinced, I haven't done an overlay. I did definitely rule out the 37.10. Thanks for the picture of the Ford coin, that will make things easier. Just by eye though I still don't like the position of the fleuron and I think the A is further from the bust on the Ford coin. But even if it isn't the 37.4 obv it looks like it would probably be a new obv and new variety so either way you are doing well. Either the second of two known or a new discovery variety and unique.

I know your not but you also know that for a coin of this magnitude of rarity I have to remain skeptical until the coin proves itself. I ruled out the 37.10 that just leaves 37.4 but I'm just not willing to accept it until I check it out further. (After all, what would you think if I just immediately accepted the remaining 37.4 possibility and it later turned out to be something new? )

 

Did you happen to notice the fleuron before CONNEC?




Compare the location to where it should be if it was a 37.4. And like I said, dew the overlay and you will finally be convinced but I sure wouldn't mind it being a new variety, like possibly a 37.14-RR? That's the closest I could come up with but even that ain't right but everything fits on an overlay. :kewl:

Ribbit

Ps: I dew know that the rule of :thumb: is, when dealing with something this rare and with missing attributes, you should consider it is NOT what it appears to be and you must find something else it fits first and when that fails, then you nitpick anything possible but a damaged fleuron is taking it beyond nitpicking.

Pps: When you dew the overlay, you will not only find the fleuron before AUCTORI to be in the correct position, but the one before CONNEC will be in the correct position as well.

 

I realize die state and wear can distort details, but I am afraid I am just not seeing it. The angle of the A on yours seems quite different than on the 37.4, also the O of CONNEC seems more distant from the head on yours. Even the reverse, the arm seems to point to a different point of the D than on the RR. These Connecticuts throw me sometimes but just my opinion. Did you show it to any of the Connecticut guys in C4? Some of those guys are amazing.

 

When dealing with a low grade poorly struck coin, such as mine, you cannot nitpick the attribute points. The only way to do it is to do an overlay to see if everything fits. Plus, it doesn't hurt to do Vector Analysis, but that would require printing the pics and if you print the pics, you will do an overlay but if you do an overlay, you won't say it isn't a 37.4 because that's when you realize it is a 37.4. It's a Catch-22! :goof:

I can easily nitpick it, since I've already nitpicked more than you guys have, that's why I can argue all of your nitpicks. Here are the ones you missed on the reverse:

Fleurons between head and staff look off.
Missing "curl" of hair (bottom one).
Fleuron closest to I of INDE is pointed towards I incorrectly.

But like I've said repeatedly, if you do an overlay, then everything fits and anything "missing" is either weakly struck or damaged or worn too much to see and anything that looks "off" is due to wear and/or damage and/or condition.

So I will repeat myself for the umpteenth time, please do an overlay before saying it isn't a 37.4-RR, because it is a 37.4-RR. You all need to realize how easy it is to say it doesn't match, based on your eyesight, and then after it is certified as such, it's so easy to say I guess it is, so if you are going to say it isn't or you won't commit, don't unless you've done the overlay to see EVERYTHING is CORRECT for a 37.4-RR.

This is a very serious coin and if anyone wants to take a "stab" at it, you must do it right or keep your opinion to yourself because you only prove that because you didn't do it right, you got it wrong and then you only prove me right because you didn't listen to my repeated warnings to not base your opinion on your eyesight alone!

Do the overlay!

Ribbit

 

Great thread so far!

 

Two question: Has PCGS confirmed the attribution? Presuming they do, what's the coin worth?

 

Sorry Toadie, I already have a dozen of them....... just kidding. Congrats. Traci

 

Does PCGS attribute Connecticuts? I have only seen them labeled "draped bust Left". I would let someone like Chris Young look at it. Or post a photo on the C4 email group.

 

I will know shortly. It's slated for shipping out NLT EoB today so it can make it to Dallas Friday (catalog deadline). I figure I will hear from them around 6 PM CST, which will be 4 PM their time.

I don't know why they wouldn't attribute it as a 37.4-RR. It's clearly a 37.4 obverse and a RR reverse and it isn't any other known variety or new variety. I could easily attribute it in hand at the C4 convention and others had problems with the fleuron before AUCTORI and they wouldn't listen to me on how to do the digital overlay, since the two coins used (mine and a 37.4-k.1) were not struck the same (slightly off from one another) and they were orientating the two coins by the edge instead of by the design (busts). I got so frustrated I screamed, since it took 5 hours to do nothing. :goofer:

So I hope I'm not dealing with that with PCGS but Ron Guth also collects CT's, when he can, so he knows what it is too and I have these threads running so all the arguments are playing out here now and can be referenced by the attributer if needed.

Ribbit

 

There are too many Chris's in the C4 group so which one is he?

Ron Guth said they had an attributer that would attribute it but I haven't a clue who it is and they are aware of these threads so like I just said, all the arguments are playing out here and the only viable one is the one fleuron but once the overlay is done, that one is covered, so . . . .

We just gotta wait. It's driving me nutz! :goofer:

Ribbit

Ps: Dave Palmer did weigh in and agrees it is a 37.4-RR, if you know Dave. Plus, so did Will Nipper but Will agreed at C4 so I'm starting to wonder how many peeps it takes to attribute a CT.

 

Not even sure if Chris Young is a member, but he is good. If Dave Palmer and Will Nipper agree it looks promising.

 

The one with the pony tail.

 

Any update?

As I'm sure you understand, these coins are not attributed in forums threads nor from photo overlays.

Hoping to hear some good news....Mike

 

When I saw him a year ago with hair cut short and shaved, I didn't recognize him. Happy to see he is returning to his old self!

 

I forgot to mention that Eric Cheung & Jeff Rock also agree. Jeff is the one responsible for outting it. But that was in the story. Jeff's a good friend! :hug:

Ribbit :goofer:

 

I had a late customer and didn't finish with them until just after 7 (CST) and I called them and got the answering machine. I dropped Guth a line but I think he's out of the office so I guess I'll have to wait till Friday to find out.

Ribbit