2009 Lincoln cent varieties: list them in the Red Book PROFESSIONAL EDITION?

Dentuck

Should die varieties of the 2009 Lincoln Bicentennial cents (e.g., the Formative Years "Extra Finger" variety) be listed in the next Professional Edition of the Red Book?


[Edited to clarify ---> Red Book Professional Edition, not the regular edition.]

Walmann

Would this result in the Red Book becoming a two volume set each year?

RWB

No. List only major varieties that have an established record of acceptance. Cluttering the Guide Book does not make it better.

Dentuck

I've edited the post title to clarify: I'm talking about the Professional Edition, not the regular edition Red Book.

Constantine

Yes. As I have posted on an other thread here on CU. Yes, it is true that there are many varieties found but even with 75++ identified, there are only a small handful that truly stand out. The rest are very insignificant in my opinion. Literally a small blip in the finger area. But why does that need to detract from the major varieties of the Formative Years series? It seems that often in double dies there are many versions of the same variety. We as collectors are always weeding out the best.

But there is what I call The Big Three that are significant, easily identifiable, and based on appearance......they are marketable. So I say from a practical manner in listing in a guide book, list out the top major versions (whether that is 3-10) and then group the lesser varieties as those are all very similar in appearance. Seems practical to me.

Here are what I call The Big Three:

CDDR-001 "Double Thumb"
CDDR-002 "Sixth Finger"
CDDR-009 "Skeleton Finger"

The Skeleton Finger from my own personal experiences and from what others are saying is the toughest of the three to find. The CDDR-009 is also paired with the CDD0-002 showing slight notching he lower left corners of ERTY in LIBERTY. With strong extra thickness on the lower hair and beard details. Light extra thickness shows on the date with a notch showing on the underside of the top left of the 2 and on the bottom left corner of the 2.

It is believe that the "Skeleton Finger" is the toughest because the obverse die shared it's production time with the lesser double die reverse (CDDR-006) which failed sometime during the production run and the die was pulled and replaced with a new reverse die which was the CDDR-009 (Skeleton Finger)! As these two reverse DDRs ( CDDR-006 & CDDR-009 with CDDO-002) each shared part of the production run, then each of them would have much less of them being produced as compared to one individual Formative Year DDR that made a full production on its own. Therefore, this variety has a lot less of them and harder to find compared to the other listed Formative Year varieties.

I just think in time these deserve respect through listing in the guide books and if that can happen, then more interest can build. Crawford, Wexler, CONECA, Potter, & Copper Coins have verified that these are true double dies, and have extensively research and listed the varieties. I don't see why the Red Book and Cherrypickers cannot select the major varieties and list them as well.

19Lyds

Why limit the question to only the "Formative Years" Cents?

Birthplace Cents (P & D):
DDO = 3
DDR = 118

Formative Years (P, D, & S):
DDO = 21
DDR = 117

Professional Life (P):
DDO = 3
DDR = 18

Presidency Years (P & D):
DDO = 2
DDR = 5

Total = 287

Judging from these figures, there is no way that this would ever happen since you're talking adding a minimum of 72 physical pages (4 varieties per page) and quite frankly, some of these are really, really, minute DDO/DDR coins.

Listing the major ones would be a different story though. But then determining what's major and what's minor could get a fellow shot!

I guess the next thing to determine would be whose cataloging would be referenced? Wiles, Wexler, or Crawford since all three do not necessarily agree. In other words, would it be DDR-xxx with cross reference to CDDR and WDDR, or would it be CDDR-xxx with cross reference to DDR and WDDR or what?

crypto79

I think the market has spoken and the support of these is light at best. The DC quarter is the only recent hubbing error that would make me want to read more which is one of the points of adding it to a book. Most of what passes for errors these days(speared bison anyone) does not appear to be the kind of errors that fan the dreams of collectors young and old like a 1955 or 1918/7 IMHO

tahoe98

....wouldn't doing that minimize sales of the CPG's?

crypto79

<< <i>Yes. As I have posted on an other thread here on CU. Yes, it is true that there are many varieties found but even with 75++ identified, there are only a small handful that truly stand out. The rest are very insignificant in my opinion. Literally a small blip in the finger area. But why does that need to detract from the major varieties of the Formative Years series? It seems that often in double dies there are many versions of the same variety. We as collectors are always weeding out the best.

But there is what I call The Big Three that are significant, easily identifiable, and based on appearance......they are marketable. So I say from a practical manner in listing in a guide book, list out the top major versions (whether that is 3-10) and then group the lesser varieties as those are all very similar in appearance. Seems practical to me.

Here are what I call The Big Three:

CDDR-001 "Double Thumb"
CDDR-002 "Sixth Finger"
CDDR-009 "Skeleton Finger"

The Skeleton Finger from my own personal experiences and from what others are saying is the toughest of the three to find. The CDDR-009 is also paired with the CDD0-002 showing slight notching he lower left corners of ERTY in LIBERTY. With strong extra thickness on the lower hair and beard details. Light extra thickness shows on the date with a notch showing on the underside of the top left of the 2 and on the bottom left corner of the 2.

It is believe that the "Skeleton Finger" is the toughest because the obverse die shared it's production time with the lesser double die reverse (CDDR-006) which failed sometime during the production run and the die was pulled and replaced with a new reverse die which was the CDDR-009 (Skeleton Finger)! As these two reverse DDRs ( CDDR-006 & CDDR-009 with CDDO-002) each shared part of the production run, then each of them would have much less of them being produced as compared to one individual Formative Year DDR that made a full production on its own. Therefore, this variety has a lot less of them and harder to find compared to the other listed Formative Year varieties.

I just think in time these deserve respect through listing in the guide books and if that can happen, then more interest can build. Crawford, Wexler, CONECA, Potter, & Copper Coins have verified that these are true double dies, and have extensively research and listed the varieties. I don't see why the Red Book and Cherrypickers cannot select the major varieties and list them as well. >>



If that's not a completely objective POV form a clear Morgan collector I don't know what is.

1tommy

I just think in time these deserve respect through listing in the guide books and if that can happen, then more interest can build. Crawford, Wexler, CONECA, Potter, & Copper Coins have verified that these are true double dies, and have extensively research and listed the varieties. I don't see why the Red Book and Cherrypickers cannot select the major varieties and list them as well. >> well just a newbies point of view yes yes yes the wisconsin quarters were just a tiny extra leaf and prices are still good for those, it would be different if you needed to use a loop to see these but there pretty plain to see, how many are out there will determine there value in the future, and the top 3 i say for sure . By the way i have yet to find any of these so there is no gain for me but i will keep searching with the hope of adding these to my collection of errors.............

19Lyds

Given the shear volume of varieties for the Lincoln BiCentennial Cents, I'm thinking John Wexler or James Wiles could publish a complete book based solely on the 2009 coins!
The heck with the CPG!

luckyman

In the end, the publisher must make this determination. If they look at this objectively and not from a TPG point of view, I think they have to conclude due to the fact that the (predominantly) formative series

double die varieties are identified and catalogued by respected entities, that these must be included. They have as much validity as any other double die variety (especially as pointed out the top three varieties).

I think that the test of time will tell, as collectors have less and less access to the key-date mint boxed sets and the numbers become clearer as to which varieties are actually the rarest. I understand that they

are not as sexy as the '55 dd Lincoln but again...these will age and perhaps become more legendary. I personally have been collecting them, hunting, and enjoying the discoveries from the beginning. I do

have a vested interest in the outcome of this decision by the publisher of the Red Book (professional series or regular series). When I began in the world of coin collecting a couple of years back, I relied almost

solely on the Red Book for information and values. It would be a shame to see important discoveries/errors left out and future collectors not be aware of or excited to own them imho. I do understand the

practical side of adding umpteen pages to the book to recognize these, but I believe they could edit down to just a few "majors" of each and mention "minor" varieties in a blurb or have a generic price guide on

the "minors". I'm always a little confused by the major TPG's to ignore these. Seems like it would be a financial windfall for them (see Anacs). I for one don't give that much added value to an Anacs slabbed coin

compared to PCGS or NGC, so again, I'm mystified. So it is up to publications such as the Red Book to lead the industry into the real world of recognizing the already recognized by us, the collectors.

Bochiman

<< <i>I think the market has spoken and the support of these is light at best. The DC quarter is the only recent hubbing error that would make me want to read more which is one of the points of adding it to a book. Most of what passes for errors these days(speared bison anyone) does not appear to be the kind of errors that fan the dreams of collectors young and old like a 1955 or 1918/7 IMHO >>



I'm with Crypto on this

08HALA20

I vote YES,

As mentioned I think listing all the varieeties would be over kill, but the more obvious should be listed.

Joe

291fifth

Very minor varieties of that sort don't deserve a listing.

They are hyped in the year of issue and then quickly forgotten.

Constantine

True, many are minor. However, I do not believe that all of the die varieties are minor:

CDDR-001


CDDR-002


CDDR-009

LeeG

I feel the redbooks should stick to the basics around each series. There could be mention of credible varities but not get too indepth with it. Let other volumes such as Cherrypickers get into the details.

atarian

If they did it would turn into a 2/3 volume set.Think of Red book, an error book and cherry pickers guide all rolled into one. ( I would think errors should be thrown in once we are going this far with variations

RWB

Cluttering the Professional Guide Book does not make it better.

Dentuck

<< <i>Cluttering the Professional Guide Book does not make it better. >>



Heehee! Okay, I see where you're coming from. :-)

coppercoins

So here briefly watching another thread, I run across this one. I figure I should chime in here.

My personal opinion is that there is such a short following for these minor die varieties that there would not be cause to list them in a generalist's guide. If we were talking about a Lincoln Cent specific guide, or even a guide devoted to doubled dies alone, my opinion would be different. I personally am not impressed with all the centrally focused doubled dies of late, primarily because of the sheer number of dies found and the fact that they do not affect enough of the overall design to warrant much value, following, or interest.

Yeah....it's really me posting that.

1tommy

<< <i>Very minor varieties of that sort don't deserve a listing.

They are hyped in the year of issue and then quickly forgotten. >>

PCGS Description Design 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 2004-D Wisconsin Extra Leaf Low MS 140 185 250 850 12,000 - 2004-D Wisconsin Extra Leaf High MS 325 350 400 1,300 15,000
and i thought there were around 40,000 final count on these 1 little leaf up and 1 little leaf down lol

pitboss

I vote yes,
Major errors only though.
WDDR 001,WDDR 002, and WDDR 009 qualify in my thinking.

luckyman

Who is going to watch this vote and is it really going to make a difference in making the various publications decisions? My gut tells me that the old guard will prevail ("MODERN CRAP" is what I hear ringing in

my ear....) I've already expressed as clearly as I can which way I'd vote and why in a prior post. I respect other's opinions but I still don't know how you can differentiate between double dies.

A double die is a double die is a double die ... isn't it??? Ah....let the debate continue! Happy St. Patty's day to all!

RWB

Hey! I just learned how to do HTML underlines...had to use it someplace!

Swampboy

Another County (non-professional ) heard from - No.

19Lyds

<< <i>

<< <i>Very minor varieties of that sort don't deserve a listing.

They are hyped in the year of issue and then quickly forgotten. >>

PCGS Description Design 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 2004-D Wisconsin Extra Leaf Low MS 140 185 250 850 12,000 - 2004-D Wisconsin Extra Leaf High MS 325 350 400 1,300 15,000
and i thought there were around 40,000 final count on these 1 little leaf up and 1 little leaf down lol >>



Yes, 40,000 but there are only the two varieties.

The Lincolns, on the other hand, have close to a hundred defined and each die has the "potential" to produce a million coins. Just because folks haven't found some of them, doesn't mean they aren't there. Some folks have found literally hundreds while other folks could really care less.

Of course, this is not to say that your MS67's aren't worth a pretty penny ( doh! ) but thats a combination of the grade and the variety.

I get a kick out of the folks that are invested in one of these popular varieties that blast up to the moon and back in a month or two and then ultimately settle into ho-hum land. They think that having the variety listed in the Redbook will solidify the coins place in history and therefore boost prices back to where they were in the time they were popular. Nothing vould be further from the truth since the coin collecting hobby is a Fickled Master!

The reality is, folks have lost interest in these. These appear to be readily available but prices have dropped (due to a lack of interest) and no amount of publishing in a Redbook or inclusion in a Registry is going to change that.

The spotlight was on them for a while and slowly began to dim at around DDR-030, and now, its pretty much fading. Perhaps when these coins become "difficult to find", that will all change, but then, so many nice red ones have been socked away, that may never change.

shasta7

My opinion is that they should take the Major varieties & list them but the more minor D/D's - no... & possibly the ones where the coins
have major cracks which can be easily seen with naked eye as they have eye appeal... Example: in the formative yrs issue there were
some with major cracks... I can think of 3 using wexler's numbers.

1. WDDR-006 B
2. WDDR-013 C
3. WDDR-037 C

These long cracks can be easily seen with the naked eye... I also found 3 penny's all with a long die crack going from O of "OF"
going all the way down directly thru Lincoln's head to his chin... I haven't seen anything on this one... has anyone else? Sorta
reminds me of Lincoln being shot!!

shasta7

luckyman

Is the voting over?? Are they taking the same survey at NGC's forum?? So far it looks like the Ayes have it when you combine the yes's plus the yes with limits approx 60% , 40% for the Nays. Obviously

this vote is the most important vote of your lifetime (tongue in cheek) so let's pick up the pace, tell your friends and neighbors to get to these polls and cast their ballot. The future of numismatics is in your

hands! Happy St. Patrick's day ... Cheers!

Dentuck

<< <i> The future of numismatics is in your

hands! >>




LOL! Be careful --- you do not want to upset the cherrypicking contingent of the hobby community!

luckyman

Dentuck....seriously, what are you doing with the information you are gathering here? Are you also on other forums polling the same question? Curious to see where this goes.....with your obvious influence.

Akbeez

Quoted from my previous posting a short while back in a related thread:

Some Personal Thoughts on the 2009 Lincoln FY DDR Varieties

These coins have HUGE upside potential. In the 2009 Edition of Yeomen’s Redbook alone, there are over 30 different varieties of Lincoln Cents noted since 1959. Most of these are fairly minor varieties such as large or small dates, or “close” AM’s. While these are all very interesting – the collector has to know what they are looking for to make a find. They would not be obvious to the uninformed person.

Obvious “extra appendage-type” varieties of Lincoln Cents are relatively rare. The 1984 “doubled-ear” caused quite a stir at the time, and is currently listed in the Redbook for $250. These are currently selling for $150-200 each. There are likely other obscure varieties as well – but these will be even less-known to the average collector.

Now I’m not suggesting the “six-finger” variety will be a $100+ coin in 10 years, but I do believe it will have a significant place in Lincoln Cent history. It is said there are “too many” of these DDR sub-varieties in 2009 for real significance – and that may be partially true. But there are about 3-5 of these varieties that are both significant in ease of IDENTITY and in sufficient QUANTITY that many average collectors can own.

Varieties of Significant Interest: (The following are personal observations I am sharing based on the 200+ US Mint LP2 Mint boxes I have personally searched and carefully tabulated.)

2009 FY CDDR-002 “sixth-finger”: Most will agree that it is one of the most popular varieties. It is scarcer than the CDDR-001, and most obvious for identification. (and a WAY COOL factor)

2009 FY CDDR-001 “doubled-thumb”: One of the most common varieties, I have found about 2 CDDR-001’s for every 1 CDDR-002 coins in rolls that contain both. They are easy to identify, and also COOL.

2009 FY CDDR-006 “skeleton-finger”: A longer finger version of the CDDR-002, this variety has been found only in one specific date of mint roll boxes, and was presumably struck in far fewer numbers. (WAY COOL and scarcer)


There are many more varieties that deserve attention in this series, but most require a fair degree of close magnification and study for identification. In my opinion, the above three varieties will be the most popular in the long run.

As for inclusion in popular coin references -- keep hounding PCGS and J.T. Stanton (Cherrypickers Guide) for inclusion in their attributions. [I have conversed with Stanton on these -- he is watching -- but is waiting to see overall collector interest before moving forward]

All I can say is HAVE FUN with this STILL-FINDABLE modern variety! Isn't that what the "hunt" is all about?

_____________

This being said -- I believe at least the top 3+ varieties deserve a place in not just the PROFESSIONAL edition (I don't own that...), but the regular edition where us ordinary folks are.

From a collector's perspective in this case, I would rather be given a finger than an ear.

pitboss

The WDDR 001 is becoming very hard to find on ebay at this point .

Dentuck

Just casting a net to hear some opinions.

Manorcourtman

<< <i>So here briefly watching another thread, I run across this one. I figure I should chime in here.

My personal opinion is that there is such a short following for these minor die varieties that there would not be cause to list them in a generalist's guide. If we were talking about a Lincoln Cent specific guide, or even a guide devoted to doubled dies alone, my opinion would be different. I personally am not impressed with all the centrally focused doubled dies of late, primarily because of the sheer number of dies found and the fact that they do not affect enough of the overall design to warrant much value, following, or interest.

Yeah....it's really me posting that. >>



Well said.

touche

Skeleton finger for inclusion.