New VARIETY 1 1

[Abdulah]

It's nice to get various comments, even though they all the commenters almost all don't believe that this is a new variation, well it's very natural because they don't hold it and don't see the coin closely with accurate and certain details, but very competent and decisive those are all experts and numismatic experts like those of PCGS / NGC, ANAC, it's true that coin cases like this have never happened in the Numismatic World until now yes I really believe, examples of some well-known varieties like DDO / DDR / in 1969 S/1955 1972, 1970/ etc. close AM wide AM , RPM , small  date , large date , in 1982 lincoln D , Copper in 1983 D lincoln cent , copper in 1943 D
Lincoln cent , aluminum on 1974 D Lincoln , stell on 1944 Lincoln , double ear , and etc these are some of the boom variations that are popular today , but I have a 1961 D coin which is very odd and differs less than all 1961 D/ P / coins S, RD, BN, RB. circulating around the world, similar but not the same, when I first got this coin a few years ago, I saw this coin was normal, nothing interesting, but when I noticed about a year ago, at that time I want to save some interesting and unique Lincoln Cent special collection coins in a special plastic coin so that they are well maintained to avoid scratches and so on. Finally I looked and I noticed that the 1961 D coin is different from the others, it is smaller than the entire collection. my lincoln, finally I examined it with a 12.5 X magnifying microscope lens attached to an HP lens and also examined it with an ordinary magnifying lens, the result is that this coin is different from the 1961 D in general. even so what determines it all in the end is PCGS or NGC , ANAC etc., I hope this is true

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

Edited.  I looked at your other posts and I am removing my advice.  It is clear that you do not want advice, so I am saving my pixels for someone who wants to learn numismatics.

 

Edited July 29, 2023 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[Hoghead515]

They both look the same to me. I could be wrong but, from what Ive read, all the dies from these was made from the same master hub. I dont understand what you are seeing thats different from any other 1961 cent. 

[ldhair]

The other thread gave you the correct answer. The coin in not a new variety. 

[VKurtB]

On 7/29/2023 at 8:03 AM, Abdulah said:

It's nice to get various comments, even though they all the commenters almost all don't believe that this is a new variation, well it's very natural because they don't hold it and don't see the coin closely with accurate and certain details, but very competent and decisive those are all experts and numismatic experts like those of PCGS / NGC, ANAC, it's true that coin cases like this have never happened in the Numismatic World until now yes I really believe, examples of some well-known varieties like DDO / DDR / in 1969 S/1955 1972, 1970/ etc. close AM wide AM , RPM , small  date , large date , in 1982 lincoln D , Copper in 1983 D lincoln cent , copper in 1943 D
Lincoln cent , aluminum on 1974 D Lincoln , stell on 1944 Lincoln , double ear , and etc these are some of the boom variations that are popular today , but I have a 1961 D coin which is very odd and differs less than all 1961 D/ P / coins S, RD, BN, RB. circulating around the world, similar but not the same, when I first got this coin a few years ago, I saw this coin was normal, nothing interesting, but when I noticed about a year ago, at that time I want to save some interesting and unique Lincoln Cent special collection coins in a special plastic coin so that they are well maintained to avoid scratches and so on. Finally I looked and I noticed that the 1961 D coin is different from the others, it is smaller than the entire collection. my lincoln, finally I examined it with a 12.5 X magnifying microscope lens attached to an HP lens and also examined it with an ordinary magnifying lens, the result is that this coin is different from the 1961 D in general. even so what determines it all in the end is PCGS or NGC , ANAC etc., I hope this is true

Forget it, pal. You're on a wild goose chase.

[Sandon]

    As you had already posted a topic about this supposedly new variety, it was unnecessary to post a new topic about the same thing. As I explained in my response to your Personal Message to me, you need to explain in words just what characteristics of the one coin you see as being "smaller" than the others, as none of your photos makes this evident.

   I'll make a conjecture about what you might be seeing, at least on the obverse.  The obverse master Lincoln cent die had reportedly been in use since 1919.  Over decades of use to make the "master hubs" from which "working hubs" and ultimately coinage dies are made, the devices (Lincoln's bust) and lettering gradually became shallower and more spread out. The master die wasn't replaced until the commencement of coinage in 1969.  (Coins dated 1967-68 often appear to have the motto "IN GOD WE TRUST" against the rim, about which we have answered inquiries on this forum.) Perhaps the coinage of over 2.5 billion cents between the two mints in 1961 necessitated the creation of more than one master hub, resulting in some minute stages in the degeneration of the master die, and the "small variety" came from a die that had ultimately been prepared from an earlier master hub. The difference is so minute that it would not be of interest to the vast majority of variety collectors, assuming that it is rare by any rational standard, which it is likely not, as a number of working dies would have likely resulted from each hub. Perhaps @RWB can comment on the validity of my conjecture, or the lack thereof.

  The reverse master die had only been in use since 1959, so the above conjecture wouldn't apply to any reverse differences, which I can't see anyway.   

Edited July 29, 2023 by Sandon
changed "hypothesis" to "conjecture"

[Coinbuf]

Posting tons of photos and starting multiple threads will not change the fact that you have a severe case of Pareidolia

[RWB]

On 7/29/2023 at 1:26 PM, Sandon said:

The difference is so minute that it would not be of interest to the vast majority of variety collectors, assuming that it is rare by any rational standard, which it is likely not, as a number of working dies would have likely resulted from each hub.

The master die (called "mother die" by 19rth century mint workers), was used to prepare an annual master hub into which was impressed the full date. In turn this produced one or more annual master dies, and from these were pressed the annual working hubs and working dies. Typically, 2 or 3 (or more) annual working hubs were consumed each year for high mintage coins such as cents. There were commonly very slight differences between the annual working hubs and also between working dies. During the year, stress, steel differences, minor damage, and overall wear produced additional very slight differences in normal coins. It is these the OP is seeing. They occur to some extent with every denomination and every die.

(In all but the most specific technical discussions, we merely speak of master die, master hub and working die.)

Edited July 30, 2023 by RWB

[powermad5000]

I did not respond to the PM sent to me by the OP, because it was basically challenging me to see something that wasn't/isn't there. It also kept demanding that I pay attention. I have no problem with someone pointing out to me something I did not see, but it was full of photos with circles and arrows pointing out to me something I didn't see when I gave the OP's coin roughly 5 minutes of my life looking for something that either was not there or not significant enough to warrant any more length of time to look. I would say in my 45+ years of coin collecting, I am versed and experienced enough on what to look for when it comes to questions of this type, and I do like to give the benefit of the doubt rather than just dismissing totally that something new has a possibility of being discovered. BUT,

So we now have another thread describing the same thing, so I say once again to the OP, if you are so 100% resigned and dedicated to the fact that you discovered a totally new variety that experts who have examined over thousands and probably tens of thousands of these 1961 D Lincoln Cents over the last 60+ years who HAVE found roughly 72 date mintmark varieties have completely and totally missed that there were a large number of circulating small lettering, date, and devices cents............

then submit the one you have to NGC or PCGS and get back to us with the results.

[Hoghead515]

On 7/29/2023 at 5:15 PM, powermad5000 said:

I did not respond to the PM sent to me by the OP, because it was basically challenging me to see something that wasn't/isn't there. It also kept demanding that I pay attention. I have no problem with someone pointing out to me something I did not see, but it was full of photos with circles and arrows pointing out to me something I didn't see when I gave the OP's coin roughly 5 minutes of my life looking for something that either was not there or not significant enough to warrant any more length of time to look. I would say in my 45+ years of coin collecting, I am versed and experienced enough on what to look for when it comes to questions of this type, and I do like to give the benefit of the doubt rather than just dismissing totally that something new has a possibility of being discovered. BUT,

So we now have another thread describing the same thing, so I say once again to the OP, if you are so 100% resigned and dedicated to the fact that you discovered a totally new variety that experts who have examined over thousands and probably tens of thousands of these 1961 D Lincoln Cents over the last 60+ years who HAVE found roughly 72 date mintmark varieties have completely and totally missed that there were a large number of circulating small lettering, date, and devices cents............

then submit the one you have to NGC or PCGS and get back to us with the results.

Have you ever noticed all the ones we tried to warn on here have never posted back the results. Wonder why that is? 

[JKK]

Sometimes being on this forum feels like being one of the old guys working in a mill. Someone new shows up to clean up around one of the planers, and immediately stands in a spot where they throw the broken boards off. Old guy says, hey, not a good place to stand, good place to get clocked in the head with a flying board. New guy says nah, I know what I'm doing. No, really, says old guy, this could get you seriously hurt, that's why we don't stand there. New guy looks at old guy, basically hints that he's an old fogey who doesn't get it, and decides to stick around. Old guy says, okay, when you get hit in the head and your memory comes back, hope it includes that we tried to tell you not to stand there, and that the only way you would learn is by getting hit. Then he walks away.

We're like if the old guy stood there and kept after the very_unwise_planer_handyman_novice for half an hour pleading with him to save his own braincase from impact, and the VUPHN insists on showing the level of wisdom that is probably a result of many other past kindly meant guidances ignored about where to stand. I would rather we all walked away sooner. Once three people have told someone it's nothing, and they still insist, let's just tell them to send it in without remorse. Some already do say that. There's no point debating with someone whose mind is made up to be wrong and only wants their decision confirmed. They hear only what confirms.

[powermad5000]

On 7/30/2023 at 9:26 AM, JKK said:

There's no point debating with someone whose mind is made up to be wrong and only wants their decision confirmed.

The only thing about this is, then WHY even come on here and make a post. Since these types are so gosh darn absolutely positive that what they have is some numismatic unicorn, then why even come on here and make a post about it??? Put it on eBay and try to sell it for $500,000 like the other ones who are so sure do (I wish that could be controlled as well, but we do not have the time to be eBay coin and bullion monitors to block listings before they make it onto the main platform).

There are some people on here who post and just don't know and want advice and are grateful to get it, and there are others who post thinking they have something and when an overwhelming response comes back pointing out the true facts, then they become educated and thankful and you can see that in their last comments. It is the ones who start out not asking but stating what they have and when told it is not, they dig in like an Alabama tick and go into Pentagon defensive mode. Those are the ones that need not make a post at all.

I like to try to help people, but when ones who insist on their standpoint refuse to consider opposing viewpoints to theirs, it is now my automatic response to either (A) block them, or (B) go into default trigger response mode of "Ok, if you are so sure, then send it in to NGC and get back to us with the results". When one comes back on here and shows us the slab with the certification number and I go to NGC Verify and look it up and see it on there and see it labeled as such unicorn, then I shall bow down in reverence to the OP. I am sure I will never need to get out my kneepads though.

[JKK]

On 7/30/2023 at 11:58 AM, powermad5000 said:

The only thing about this is, then WHY even come on here and make a post. Since these types are so gosh darn absolutely positive that what they have is some numismatic unicorn, then why even come on here and make a post about it???

Who cares why?

Not saying this to be rude to you, of course, just being very candid and offering some critical thought. When someone comes here to waste our time and demand confirmation of their pareidolia, I don't care if they did it because they had a nosebleed, found a parking lot nickel, or saw something on allwetsy and decided they could get rich. I don't care and I don't see why anyone does. Once they prove this, why waste time trying to convince them? Who benefits?

Not them. Not us. Not NGC. No one. They should be put on ignore posts and left to scream into the void.

If you actually do care on reflection, for real and for true, then that's a personal decision and not for me to critique. I might not understand it, but I don't have to understand, and I accept that. But if we really don't care, let's show it. And I'm proposing that after a certain point, we should seriously consider ceasing to care. Or rather, I've already stopped caring and I hope others will join me in apathy. There are other people worth bothering with who are not pareidoliacs. I see nothing gained by taking attention and teaching from them and giving it to ingrates. This board wastes so vulgar_term_for_copulation_in_present_participle much time on ingrates, it's the functional equivalent of giving drug addicts free money.

[powermad5000]

On 7/30/2023 at 2:38 PM, JKK said:

And I'm proposing that after a certain point, we should seriously consider ceasing to care.

You did not offend me, and in my A and B examples, I basically said just that same thing.

[Reno Raines]

Whenever I have a question about a coin I keep an open mind and not just assume that I'm right and everybody else is wrong. As I always say only the truly ignorant have a closed mind.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 7/30/2023 at 3:38 PM, JKK said:

Who cares why? ot saying this to be rude to you, of course, just being very candid and offering some critical thought. When someone comes here to waste our time and demand confirmation of their pareidolia, I don't care if they did it because they had a nosebleed, found a parking lot nickel, or saw something on allwetsy and decided they could get rich. I don't care and I don't see why anyone does. Once they prove this, why waste time trying to convince them? Who benefits? Not them. Not us. Not NGC. No one. They should be put on ignore posts and left to scream into the void. If you actually do care on reflection, for real and for true, then that's a personal decision and not for me to critique. I might not understand it, but I don't have to understand, and I accept that. But if we really don't care, let's show it. And I'm proposing that after a certain point, we should seriously consider ceasing to care. Or rather, I've already stopped caring and I hope others will join me in apathy. There are other people worth bothering with who are not pareidoliacs. I see nothing gained by taking attention and teaching from them and giving it to ingrates. This board wastes so vulgar_term_for_copulation_in_present_participle much time on ingrates, it's the functional equivalent of giving drug addicts free money.

I don't think we are upset with folks ASKING about what they think might be something unusual and/or valuable.

But in most of these cases, what they are WRITING about and POSTING here is totally at odds with the pictures they post.  It's not like they found a 1927 Saint common DE and they immediately think it's the ultra-valuable and ultra-rare 1927-D.  But most of these threads involve pics where what they claim to see or have found is NOT what their pics are showing.

Many of the posters here -- notably Sandon -- have been very generous in responding to the SAME gross misevaluation of the coins that again, their own submitted pics disprove.  What they are seeing I don't know.

Edited July 30, 2023 by GoldFinger1969