Oldhoopster

Agree, all are large dates. I like to use the 2 in the date as my reference point. If you look at the pics in the previous post, you can easily see the difference in the shape. I also check the 8. The loops are the same size on the large date while the top loop is smaller on the small date and makes it look more like a snowman. Just be aware, the Denver Mint made over 6 BILLION cents (Both the copper and copper plated zinc types) in 1982 and only 2 copper small dates have been verified in almost 40 years. You'll have better odds of winning the Power Ball than finding one. Many times, those "get rich from pocket change" YouTube videos leave out a lot of important details.

Good article on the racketeering nickel and the numismatic folklore of Josh Tatum https://coinweek.com/us-coins/fact-or-myth-josh-tatum-and-racketeer-nickels/

I don't know of any way to differentiate between contemporary plating and modern plating.

I don't think @MAULEMALL is a racist. I think he's just someone who enjoys finding people to push around on an anonymous internet chat board. He probably was just trying to push your buttons and in an effort to be clever, he inadvertently stepped in it. Then he tried to save his butt by doubling down with the "Some of my best friends are..." type of comment, and dug himself deeper. At least that's how I see it. Others may see it differently. Time to just take his comments for what they are worth and move on

Agree that it's a struck through error (debris filled die).

1959-1991 reverses should all have the same AM Close/Wide AM varieties did not occur until 1992. The mint made a new CAM reverse for use starting in 1993, but some CAMs were struck in 92. In 1994, the used the old WAM reverse for Proofs. They mixed up a few in 1998-2000. I found the information here. Good site to bookmark. http://lincolncentresource.com/wideams.html

So you're saying it's ok to use an ethnic slur to make fun of other people because you don't believe it's offensive? Even after you were told specifically it was offensive? I haven't been posting here for long, but if your recent responses to the board are any indication, I think I understand what you're trying to contribute. Best of luck with your collecting endeavors.

Technically, I guess you didn't specifically call him out. I'm sure you had no intention of having some fun at the expense of another member who was just sharing his collection. I apologize for the misunderstanding

A member posted some medallions and rounds he collects. While this type of collectable may not be of interest to a lot of numismatists, when did it become acceptable to criticize another persons collection? Oh wait, your post said nothing critical about his collection, you skipped that step and went immediately to personal insult. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

It looks like something got on the coin during the packaging process and the particle/substance is causing environmental damage. Package mistakes aren't considered errors and generally reduce the value of the set. In this case, the coin is damaged, which definitely reduces the value.

I'm not sure if I ever got the diploma, but I found the letter of completion from early 1997. I enjoyed the course, but never got around to taking others.

This is the money coin. If you found it, you would know immediately

When I saw your first sentence, "Perhaps I can make my point using plain language." I thought this has to be good. You didn't disappoint.

The individual letters, date, etc are NOT punched into individual dies A coin is struck from a working die. Working dies are made from working hubs Working hubs are made from master dies. And master dies are made from the master hub The master hub contains the design, mottos, date, AND designers initials. It isn't possible for a coin to have different designers initials. If you're interested in searching for errors, you should spend time learning and understanding the minting and die making process. Many members who have been trying answer your questions are very knowledgeable of the process and are telling you that what you think you see can't occur at the mint.

Once again, look at some authentic examples and compare it to the OPs coin. What characteristics do you see that may indicate it warrants further research (especially after the comments of other knowledgeable members)? I will give you credit, however. You somehow manage to work in a comment about French roosters into many of your responses. I didn't think it was possible to do it in this thread, but you did. Congratulations.

You may want to check out Daniel Sedgwick's site and/or read his book before implying that this is anything other than a replica of a pillar and wave cob (and a poor one st that). Take the time to study the characteristics of genuine cobs and note the appearance of salvaged ones. Does it really look like it spent hundreds of years being in saltwater and tossed around beach? Did you notice the casting seam Mr. Lange pointed out in a previous post? It's irresponsible giving a new hobbiest false hope.

This is a link to a dealer who specializes in these coins. Take some time and compare your coin to those for sale. You'll easily see that your coin has none of the characteristics of an authentic pillar and wave cob. https://www.sedwickcoins.com If you still think you have something send it in. But IMO, you'll just be wasting $60+. You'll have better odds buying scratch-off tickets.

Just an FYI. Some of the members responding to your thread have decades of experience in numismatics. The are extremely knowledgeable of the minting process and have demonstrated their knowledge on coin forums over the years. They are not " some guy at the end if the bar" giving an opinion. Show it to a "pro" but make sure that pro is knowledgeable of errors and varieties. Just because somebody sells coins, doesn't mean they know about errors. I'm sorry if your gut feel says this might be something, even with the responses you were given. As you learn the minting process, you'll easily see that this cannot occur at the mint. It isn't from a defective planchet, it isn't die related, it isn't a collar problem, and it isn't a filled die. Let us know what the "Pro" says. Wouldn't want to be wasting time time trying to help new collectors learn if the aren't going to believe the responses, especially in cases where it's absolutely obvious they have a damaged coin

Sorry, but it isn't an error. It looks like your coin suffered some type of chemical exposure/damage after it left the mint.

This is what the valuable doubled die looks like. Sorry but you don't have this one

It's a large date

Sorry, but your coin is damaged and only worth face value. Getting single coin graded is roughly $50-$60, so you want to be sure you aren't wasting money when you send it in

Maybe responding to the original thread that you referenced, instead of adding this nonsense to a new, unrelated post would have been more appropriate. Seems pretty simple to me, but then again, what do know. I apologize for continuing to push this thread off track. I think @RWB has the makings for a good article/book, and I would love to read it. With that, I'm finished posting my displeasure with others dragging this off topic (yes, I am guilty too).

Sounds like somebody needs a lesson in significant figures (My freshman chemistry professor would be so disappointed) BTW: I was just wondering how the listing of the fineness of modern French gold coins relates to Roger's post? If you can tie the history of early US coin collecting to 20th century French Roosters, you're much more creative than we give you credit.