Do I Need A Patched 1823 50c

lilolme

So after getting back my semi-recent submission I noticed that I had 3 of the 1823 three's (Normal, Ugly, Broken). So do I need a Patched 3? Problem is I never got one so none to submit and would have to buy it!

Here are the three 3's I have.
If you have an 1823 (any denomination will work), then post away. Of course a Patched 50c would be nice.

Previously posted the Ugly 3.
.

.
.
The Broken 3.
This photo is interesting, when I saw it I went and looked at the coin again. That scratch just stands out in the photo. While I noticed it before, it does not jump out at you like it does in the photo. Oh well at least it did straight grade as I thought. Still like the color and overall look and surfaces.
The TV is fairly close. What is strange is the obverse is a touch darker in hand but the reverse is a touch lighter. Colors are about right.
.

.
.
The normal 3.
The photo is about right if one tilts the coin/light into a glare position. The reverse is a little more semi-PL as seen in the photo. When viewed normally there is a decent luster cartwheel and more so or further into the center on the reverse. All the colors are still there and seen when titled around.
.

.
.
I noticed something in Overton that I had not before (don't know why). I thought the above normal 1823 was an O-111. In my 3rd ed. Overton book it is called an R4. Then I saw the 111a and it seemed a match but R2?

I had always thought that the baseline Overton number, in this case 111, had the rarity number for all of the varieties/die states of that specific number (again in this case 111). But that can't be since the 111a has a rarity of R2, then all of them could be no scarcer than R2. So the 111 R4 is a die state rarity for the 111 without the or not including the 111a.

I checked pcgs and they have the 111 as R3 and 111a as R2. Similar but a few more 111 have shown up and adjusted to R3.

Checked the link below and it clarifies, as it has the title 111 as R2 but the individual 111 as R3 and 111a as R2.

So now I know. If the Overton has any die states, then the baseline Overton without a letter is also a die state rarity. The overall rarity of the variety would most likely be the lowest of the die states or maybe one notch lower.

http://www.maibockaddict.com/1823-o-111a-r2-capped-bust-half-dollar.shtml

pursuitofliberty

Oh come on, you really need a half dozen of them

In order by Overton # sequence

Broken 3, Patched 3, Normal 3, Perfect 3, Ugly 3, Extra Tall 3

Here's my Patch (the more difficult O-102)

.

.
... and my Extra Tall 3 (O-112) just for fun

jacrispies

Just a patched 3? You need all the varieties! You already have a good start, beautiful coins

This is my only 1823, it is an O-105. Not in fantastic shape, but it is a double struck piece, about 15% off center first strike. Dentil tracks can be seen in the obverse field and parts of an incuse profile visible on the center of Miss Liberty's portrait.

EagleRJO

I don’t know if it's been assignened a [separate] overton number, but isn't there also a more recent and less common 1823 50C "Tampered 3". 😉

lilolme

@pursuitofliberty said:
Oh come on, you really need a half dozen of them

In order by Overton # sequence

Broken 3, Patched 3, Normal 3, Perfect 3, Ugly 3, Extra Tall 3

Oh no, I don't know if I can handle just the red book varieties. I didn't recognize the Extra Tall 3 but looking in Overton it is written at the beginning of the 1823 date. I need to absorb more of what I read. And there is that patched 3.
.
.

@jacrispies said:
Just a patched 3? You need all the varieties! You already have a good start, beautiful coins

This is my only 1823, it is an O-105. Not in fantastic shape, but it is a double struck piece, about 15% off center first strike. >Dentil tracks and incuse profile visible on the center of Miss Liberty's portrait.

Thanks. That is cool on the strike. Had not seen one like it.
.
.

@EagleRJO said:
I don’t know if it's been assignened an overton number yet, but isn't there also a more recent and less common 1823 50C "Tampered 3". 😉

Nice information. I have never heard of a Tampered 3. From that description would it be an existing Overton number but a later die state with a die chip?

I have the book Bust Half Fever 1995 and that author states that he believes (or maybe believed since it is nearly 30 years ago) that the broken 3 was a new die punch that turned out to be to shallow and created the broken 3. The punch was subsequently corrected after seeing results. I think I stated all that correctly. I don't know if that has now been proven incorrect or mostly matches the description above.

lkeigwin

1823 is a very fun year for Redbook and die state collectors. The Mint botched so much.

Do you need a patched 3? Sure, if you want the set. The O.102 is the tough one but the O.101a suffices.

Here is my O.101a, MS62, and the same die marriage O.101 before the "fix" (AU50).
Lance.

EagleRJO

@lilolme said:
Nice information. I have never heard of a Tampered 3. From that description would it be an existing Overton number but a later die state with a die chip?

It does look like the "Tampered 3" has a distinctly different shape vs the others, and is described from the article above as it ... "looks like a patched 3 with a blob within the central gap on the outside of the "3" (right side) - but the central piece inside the "3" (left side) is still present and unbroken". So it would not be just a different die state for one of the others.

I did a little more digging, including checking my Parsley variety book, and it appears it is already attributed as an overton O-106A (see attached example) with the distinctly different shape of the "3", but just not with the distinct name. So it does look like a "Tampered 3" can be added to the list as identified in the infographic above, but it's still not listed in the RB or CoinFacts. ;-)

lilolme

@EagleRJO said:

@lilolme said:
Nice information. I have never heard of a Tampered 3. From that description would it be an existing Overton number but a later die state with a die chip?

It does look like the "Tampered 3" has a distinctly different shape vs the others, and is described from the article above as it ... "looks like a patched 3 with a blob within the central gap on the outside of the "3" (right side) - but the central piece inside the "3" (left side) is still present and unbroken". So it would not be just a different die state for one of the others.

I did a little more digging, including checking my Parsley variety book, and it appears it is already attributed as an overton O-106A (see attached example) with the distinctly different shape of the "3", but just not with the distinct name. So it does look like a "Tampered 3" can be added to the list as identified in the infographic above, but it's still not listed in the RB or CoinFacts. ;-)

Thanks. When I checked this website they have the O-106 and 106a. The 106a is identified as a die crack at stars and curl. Looks like @lkeigwin provided the photo for it.

http://www.maibockaddict.com/1823-o-106a-r2-capped-bust-half-dollar.shtml

However, the O-106 description does include a discussion about the 3 being different and even has the words tampered with used along with the potential die chip. Coinfacts also has the 106 and 106a listed.

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1823-50c-overton-106/39609

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1823-50c-overton-106a/39610

So definitely a different 3 there. I am still not sure I will ever get the patched to complete the red book but maybe.

lilolme

@lkeigwin said:
1823 is a very fun year for Redbook and die state collectors. The Mint botched so much.

Do you need a patched 3? Sure, if you want the set. The O.102 is the tough one but the O.101a suffices.

Here is my O.101a, MS62, and the same die marriage O.101 before the "fix" (AU50).
Lance.

Nice ones. I also saw in the book where 1823 also had some of the strike doubling (profile thing) to go along with the other 'problems' of the year. A lot going on that year.

logger7

I'd buy one before the price goes even higher if you can afford it, which holds true of many of the classic rarities.....

Smudge

Back then the mint got their moneys worth from a set of dies. I like a frugal government agency.

jacrispies

@Smudge said:
Back then the mint got their moneys worth from a set of dies. I like a frugal government agency.

They had no choice. Die steel was not up to the standards of today, and the hardening process was imperfect. This caused a lot of die issues that were almost inevitable.

EagleRJO

@lilolme said:
However, the O-106 description does include a discussion about the 3 being different and even has the words tampered with used along with the potential die chip.

Thanks, I will definitely take another look at the write up in my die variety book for the O-106, vs the O-106A I mentioned. The "Tampered 3" name from the article and infographic would make complete sense if it's described as "tampered with" as part of that variety. 😉

EagleRJO

@lilolme said:
However, the O-106 description does include a discussion about the 3 being different and even has the words tampered with used along with the potential die chip. Coinfacts also has the 106 and 106a listed.

Just as a follow up I doubled checked my Parsley varieties book, PCGS CoinFacts as well as NGC VarietyPlus and it is the Overton O-106A variety I mentioned that has the misshapen "3" in the date referred to as a "Tampered 3".

The O-106 describes the date as having a "large well-formed 3 that is taller than 182" as per Parsley, and doesn't have the misshapen "3". Attached is an example of the date for a O-106 from CoinFacts consistent with Parsley that shows the 3 looks pretty normal.

The O-106A is the one that describes the date where "the three has either been tampered with or a chip has broken out of the die" as per Parsley. Attached is an example of the date for a O-106A from CoinFacts consistent with Parsley that shows the misshapen "3" in the date referred to as a "Tampered 3".

I think there may be some confusion resulting from poorly worded descriptions and mislabeled photographs in the maibockaddict.com webpage. I wouldn't use that source. In any event I don't think it's really a big deal since the RB and CoinFacts don't identify that distinctly different "Tampered 3" date.

lilolme

@EagleRJO
Thanks and definitely a difference in the 3 there.

The 106a is not in my old overton as it is a newer die state. I am wondering now what is the criteria for a 106a?

Is it the change in the 3?
Is it the die crack in the stars to curl?
Or do you need both?

If Not both then:
Did the 3 happen before the die cracks or after?
If before, then there could be some 106 with the tampered 3.
If after, then there could be some 106a without the tampered 3.
Of maybe they coincidently happened about the same time.

Did that make any sense?

Well at least it won't be impacting me. As I said I might not even get the final red book patched 3. But still curious as to what is going on with it. Thanks again for the input.

EagleRJO

I think for it to truely be an O-106A it would need everything that is identified for that variety. Otherwise it's just an O-106 earlier die state, even if there are some signs on the actual struck coin of a later die state. Most resources like Parsley specifically avoid those in between states which could be endless. I think unless you take that approach you could be going down that rabbit hole on every variety you look at. 😉

lilolme

@EagleRJO said:
I think for it to truely be an O-106A it would need everything that is identified for that variety. Otherwise it's just an O-106 earlier die state, even if there are some signs on the struck coin of a later die state. I think unless you take that approach you could be going down that rabbit hole on every variety you look at. 😉

Thanks and I agree it needs everything identified for the variety - die state.

But I was asking because I don't know what it needs or what the 106a requirements are. Not in my Overton and that one website is the only thing I have seen on it. I don't have your information you quoted. So curious what the requirements are for 106a.

So are you saying it needs both a tampered 3 and the noted die cracks?

lkeigwin

The O.106 has three significant die states, in chronological order.

• No die cracks and a well-formed 3
• The Tampered-with 3
• Die crack S11 to S13 through the lower curls and into the field above the date.

The O.106a, by Overton's definition, has the die crack, like below.
Lance.

lilolme

@lkeigwin said:
The O.106 has three significant die states, in chronological order.

• No die cracks and a well-formed 3
• The Tampered-with 3
• Die crack S11 to S13 through the lower curls and into the field above the date.

The O.106a, by Overton's definition, has the die crack, like below.
Lance.

Cool. Thanks that explains it fairly clearly.
So a tampered 3 could theoretically show up on a 106 (without or before the full die cracks).

pursuitofliberty

@lilolme said:
Cool. Thanks that explains it fairly clearly.
So a tampered 3 could theoretically show up on a 106 (without or before the full die cracks).

>

Yes. As Lance stated, we have been able to recognize three die states for the 106 Die Marriage, and the "Tampered 3" happens before the "Die crack from S11 to S13 through the lower curls and into the field above the date"

lilolme

Thanks all for the discussion and information.
I have added a Post It to my Overton for the 106a and a 2nd Post It for the Tampered 3. Might not ever use it again but then I might next week. Never know.

@logger7 said:
I'd buy one before the price goes even higher if you can afford it, which holds true of many of the classic rarities.....

This does seem to be true based on what I have seen for the ones I have here and a several others. I know comparing a raw purchase price to a slabbed guide price is not one to one but many are clearly higher. Also the price guide history - in this case online pcgs or old greysheets also often has similar results. But I am also looking at around 20 years ago.

EagleRJO

@lilolme said:
... I was asking because I don't know what it needs or what the 106a requirements are. Not in my Overton and that one website is the only thing I have seen on it. I don't have your information you quoted. So curious what the requirements are for 106a.

The follow up info posted by Lance and Todd matches what is stated in the varieties book I have. If you collect older half dollars I would recommend getting the latest (5th Edition) of Parsley's "US Early Half Dollar Die Varieties 1794-1836" book.

Getting that book was one of the best things I did when jumping into collecting older half dollars, particularly with the variability of hand punched dies for those coins, as well as the misleading or inaccurate info that is out there on the web like the site mentioned. The book is well worth the purchase price imo. 😉

EagleRJO

@Smudge said:
Back then the mint got their moneys worth from a set of dies. I like a frugal government agency.

Completely agree! Plus you end up with interesting variability of the older coins that I think is lacking with modern struck coins. Particularly since the mint switched to a single press die production.

lilolme

@EagleRJO said:

@lilolme said:
... I was asking because I don't know what it needs or what the 106a requirements are. Not in my Overton and that one website is the only thing I have seen on it. I don't have your information you quoted. So curious what the requirements are for 106a.

The follow up info posted by Lance and Todd matches what is stated in the varieties book I have. If you collect older half dollars I would recommend getting the latest (5th Edition) of Parsley's "US Early Half Dollar Die Varieties 1794-1836" book.

Getting that book was one of the best things I did when jumping into collecting older half dollars, particularly with the variability of hand punched dies for those coins, as well as the misleading or inaccurate info that is out there on the web like the site mentioned. The book is well worth the purchase price imo. 😉

Thanks for the suggestion. It has also been suggested that I get the Die State Progression of capped bust halves.

I am currently just submitting some older purchases (about 20 years ago). Kind of fun but not sure how much I will get into it later. I did and still do find them kind of interesting and why I got a couple books years ago.

However, I am feeling particularly dumb. The Overton book I have will list the die states (usually 'a') right below the original one. For the 106 there is no 'a' and half a blank page. So no 'a'. Or so I thought. After putting the Post It's on the page I was looking through it some more and later saw that after turning the page the 106a is listed there. Never thought to turn the page and look because they are generally on that same page. I think it was done this way because the 106a has a separate picture, for that 3 probably. But the 106a is there and mentions the 3 and tampered with look. Ha ha, oh well, I learned another one - look on the next page. Fairly simple.

EagleRJO

Well at least you found the info! I occasionally have those "I could have had a V8" moments too, so you are not alone there ... 😆

Of the various sets I have, working on the older half dollars is for me the most interesting so far due to the variability. I think a really close second is Trade Dollars with chop marks, as long as the punches are not overdone.

And one of these days I will cross over to the "dark side" and start adding 8 Reales to the collections, which should also be an "interesting" adventure as raw coins are by far my hands-down preference.

P.S. To answer your original question ... Yes, you definitely do "Need A Patched 1823 50c" imo.