Contrarian on Varieties!!!!

keoj

I too have mixed opinions of varieties but I'll take a different slant. Let me put it into context first. Like a few others on the board, I am a Trade Dollar specialist. On the recognized Registry today is the 1875-S/CC as a required variety. An optional variety listed is the 1876-CC DDR. On a good coin, with a good 4X loupe (my eyes....I'm getting older), I can pick out a S/CC coin. On a bad day, looking at a bad scan I can pick out a 76-CC DDR at 3 feet. So....on one hand, I have to get a subtle S/CC in order to finish my set. On the other hand, the 76-CC is one of the MOST dramatic DD's of any series (and recognized as such) and isn't required in the set. Seems like a consistency issue here.

Okay, the reality is that I do collect varieties....some subtle, some obvious (I take some exception to those who classify them as oddities or worthless). One the pride and joys of my collection is a 1876-S DDO (one of 5 extant). BTW, I don't have deep pockets, I worked VERY hard and was lucky to find one....it wasn't about money. The few Trade dollar collectors that I know would gladly trade a rare high grade coin for an opportunity to own a R6-7 76-S DDO in any condition (similar to the 1916 DDO nickle). Why is that?

I suspect that any series will have debate over what should be included or not. I for one, use the Cherrypickers guide to distinguish "collectable" varities and am glad that NGC is willing to add these designations on the slab. BTW, will PCGS do that if you ask them?

I guess it comes down to the definition of mainstream collecting that someone mentioned earlier. The point of this note is that one should be careful (including PCGS) about classifying what are collectable varieties or not. I suspect that this is a religious arguement here....some collectors view their sets as complete without including varities and others will view the same sets as complete. I don't have a solution here other than to set the "bar" (like F&S have tried to do) and allow those people who collect varieties to share their accomplishments with others that share their same desires. At the same time don't penalize those who choose the mainstream route.

Constructive comments welcome.

keoj

keoj

I just moved and can't find my Redbook. Who defines inclusion of varieties?

shirohniichan

I think varieties should be optional. In the trade dollar series, I see the main varieties as the "type" I and II obverses and reverses since these were intentional design changes. Double dies and repunched mintmarks are indeed interesting to collect and research, but I still see "mistakes" as less important to a series as intentional varieties.

Alas, my quest for an 1876 II/II has been unfruitful and frustrating these past few years. I'd like to be able to consider my 1876 year set complete without it (especially since I don't include type I & II reverses on dimes, quarters and halves), but its absence still bothers me.

KoinKollector

I welcome the whole idea. Only problem, I dont think any varities were included in the 1980 RB concerning seated dimes. So are we gonna need both the large & small O 41-O closed buds? Im almost certain the varities for my series will remain the same and the 73 DDO will remain an optional coin. As it should.