<< <i>I tried to highlight the areas of "irregularity" on the date and found a good number. One messed up die.
Still I can't believe that those lumps are really an 'underdate'
I think it's just coincidental randomness.
I apologize in advance for editing this image, but I do not have an image of my own to edit.
>>
There are many die gouges. These could be the mint employee trying to remove the underdate. Take a look at just the 3. The underlying 2 are totally different types of marks than the gouges. The gouges are what seem to make some think they are all the same.
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
<< <i>In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
However why not just list it as a 1936/2?, (That is 1936 over 2 question mark for last digit) if the last digit is cannot be determined?
Even so- no matter what it really is, It is still neat and is on my "Cherrypick" - buy list. An 1824 over various dates bust half comes to mind.
This thread should be meant to enlighten - not call someone jealous or a know-it-all. I would like to know the true answer but will settle for 1936/2?, until a more positive determination is proven.
<< <i>I can try if fcloud is okay with it, but the problem is that the close-up is cropped so close that there are not any other elements to tell me the images are aligned properly. On the earlier photo overlays I did the rim, bust, and designers initials were all used to make sure the images were precisely aligned. I have Photoshop on my work computer so I won't be able to try anything until later in the week.
Sean Reynolds >>
Yes, it was the alignment with the bust and the designer's initials that proved it was not a 1936/1929.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Instead of making a louder argument (SKIP THE CAPSLOCK), how about presenting a better one?
<< <i>In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your post is an attempt at humor.
Sean Reynolds
Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
<< <i>I'd like to discuss the nutritional value of horse meat.
Not to be mistaken for a serious vegan. >>
Should be nice and tender after being beaten this much........
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I am guessing that we should be making comparisons to the 1928-S obverse to see if things line up...and how well they line up? And then it begs to question, how many different 1928-S Obverses are there....any slight variations? I have a 1928-Large S somewhere....but not a normal 1928-S. It seems 1928 might be the best year to examine right now. Any further thoughts on this?
"If it's not fun, it's not worth it." - KeyMan64 Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
>>><< In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your post is an attempt at humor.<<<
No attempt at humor here.......anyone that can't see that is a 2 under the 3 is blind. stupid or both!!!!
In the first place two die gouges coming together would not form like that. One would form a ridge over the other. And the fact that it IS the same shape exactly as the 2 used in Mercs of that perion proves it is a 2!!!!! Weather it is a 1929 or 1928 or whatever........it IS an overdate!!!!
This time I AM COMPLETELY THROUGH WITH THIS THREAD....AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED......THE HORSE IS DEAD AND IN HAMBERGER FORM NOW!
<< <i>I am guessing that we should be making comparisons to the 1928-S obverse to see if things line up...and how well they line up? And then it begs to question, how many different 1928-S Obverses are there....any slight variations? I have a 1928-Large S somewhere....but not a normal 1928-S. It seems 1928 might be the best year to examine right now. Any further thoughts on this? >>
"If it's not fun, it's not worth it." - KeyMan64 Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>Yes, it was the alignment with the bust and the designer's initials that proved it was not a 1936/1929. >>
I agree. Unless there were 1929 dies with different date positions then the "2" should be over to the right more in relation to the 1936 date.
<< <i>>>><< In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
No attempt at humor here.......anyone that can't see that is a 2 under the 3 is blind. stupid or both!!!! >>
Besides the CPG are there any other variety experts/catalogers that list this as an overdate/DDO? Surely there's at least one that isn't blind or stupid.
<< <i> Instead of making a louder argument (SKIP THE CAPSLOCK), how about presenting a better one?
<< <i>In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your post is an attempt at humor.
Sean Reynolds >>
I had one hormonally-challenged boss whose response to being proven wrong was to REPEAT THE ERROR IN A LOUDER VOICE!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Comments
<< <i>I tried to highlight the areas of "irregularity" on the date and found a good number. One messed up die.
Still I can't believe that those lumps are really an 'underdate'
I think it's just coincidental randomness.
I apologize in advance for editing this image, but I do not have an image of my own to edit.
There are many die gouges. These could be the mint employee trying to remove the underdate. Take a look at just the 3. The underlying 2 are totally different types of marks than the gouges. The gouges are what seem to make some think they are all the same.
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
<< <i>In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
However why not just list it as a 1936/2?, (That is 1936 over 2 question mark for last digit) if the last digit is cannot be determined?
Even so- no matter what it really is, It is still neat and is on my "Cherrypick" - buy list.
This thread should be meant to enlighten - not call someone jealous or a know-it-all. I would like to know the true answer but will settle for 1936/2?, until a more positive determination is proven.
Bob
<< <i>I can try if fcloud is okay with it, but the problem is that the close-up is cropped so close that there are not any other elements to tell me the images are aligned properly. On the earlier photo overlays I did the rim, bust, and designers initials were all used to make sure the images were precisely aligned. I have Photoshop on my work computer so I won't be able to try anything until later in the week.
Sean Reynolds >>
Yes, it was the alignment with the bust and the designer's initials that proved it was not a 1936/1929.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your post is an attempt at humor.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
Not to be mistaken for a serious vegan.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>I'd like to discuss the nutritional value of horse meat.
Not to be mistaken for a serious vegan. >>
Should be nice and tender after being beaten this much........
Could we beat a dead buffalo now ?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your post is an attempt at humor.<<<
No attempt at humor here.......anyone that can't see that is a 2 under the 3 is blind. stupid or both!!!!
In the first place two die gouges coming together would not form like that. One would form a ridge over the other. And the fact that it IS the same shape exactly as the 2 used in Mercs of that perion proves it is a 2!!!!! Weather it is a 1929 or 1928 or whatever........it IS an overdate!!!!
This time I AM COMPLETELY THROUGH WITH THIS THREAD....AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED......THE HORSE IS DEAD AND IN HAMBERGER FORM NOW!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Lookie here: a Face on Mars!
Is that Jesus?
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>I am guessing that we should be making comparisons to the 1928-S obverse to see if things line up...and how well they line up? And then it begs to question, how many different 1928-S Obverses are there....any slight variations? I have a 1928-Large S somewhere....but not a normal 1928-S. It seems 1928 might be the best year to examine right now. Any further thoughts on this? >>
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>Yes, it was the alignment with the bust and the designer's initials that proved it was not a 1936/1929. >>
I agree. Unless there were 1929 dies with different date positions then the "2" should be over to the right more in relation to the 1936 date.
<< <i>>>><< In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
No attempt at humor here.......anyone that can't see that is a 2 under the 3 is blind. stupid or both!!!! >>
Besides the CPG are there any other variety experts/catalogers that list this as an overdate/DDO? Surely there's at least one that isn't blind or stupid.
Franklin-Lover's Forum
<< <i>IF YOU CAN NOT SEE THIS YOU NEED TO BE IN ANOTHER HOBBY!!! >>
I'm glad that my particular mentors never responded to me in this manner when I started showing an interest in die varieties.
I'd also suggest that its not I that needs to find a new hobby but, perhaps certain other folks should consider it?
Rational explanation should never be denounced in favor of "because I said so".
The name is LEE!
<< <i> Instead of making a louder argument (SKIP THE CAPSLOCK), how about presenting a better one?
<< <i>In a screaming voice "THAT IS A 2 NOT DIE GOUGES IN THE 3"!!!!!!!!!!! >>
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your post is an attempt at humor.
Sean Reynolds >>
I had one hormonally-challenged boss whose response to being proven wrong was to REPEAT THE ERROR IN A LOUDER VOICE!