Ok Half Dime Variety Experts.... 6/19/19 - BIG UPDATE!!
Is this 1849 over 6 OR 1849 over 8?
PCGS claims 1849/8 H10C Overdate FS-302 (001.55) in AU50. For starters, I agree with everyone else here. It was originally in a PCGS 1849/8 holder and I after doing my homework I sent it in to be corrected and TrueViewed.
I saw the result and got a hold of PCGS customer service before it shipped back. I explained the diagnostics and they said they would review it. I'll be considering what to do with it now. I really don't feel like going back & forth with PCGS on this.
I can't with a clear conscious have this in my registry when it's not right.
Thanks to those who responded especially yosclimber who provided a huge weath of information.
My coin:
For comparison, here's an identical die marriage referenced by yosclimber that PCGS certified as 1849/6....
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Comments
V-2.
It's easy to attribute from the reverse cracks:
See my color PDF attribution guide for 1849:
https://web.stanford.edu/~clint/hdag/index.htm
I describe the V-2 obverse die as "9 over far 6".
PCGS calls it 9/6.
NGC calls it 9/8, which has yielded a lot of confusion.
It is also known as FS-302, but V-2 predates FS- by many decades.
This obverse die is later used for V-6, which has a different reverse die crack pattern.
The other main overdate obverse for 1849 is V-4,
which has still another different reverse die crack pattern.
I describe the V-4 obverse die as "9 over near 6".
PCGS calls it 9/8 (which is what Valentine called it in 1931).
NGC calls it 9/6.
Also known as FS-301.
This obverse die is later used for V-5, which has a different (very light) reverse die crack pattern.
V-1 also has an overdate, but it's harder to see.
So confusion reigns.
The confusion is not entirely the fault of the slabbing companies - in the past, the half dime experts (notably Valentine, Breen and Blythe) were somewhat divided on what the underdigits were.
Especially when Bill Fivaz published an article in the March 1985 Gobrecht Journal declaring that the underdigit of V-2 was an 8!
Tom DeLorey carefully explained the 1849 overdates in the very next July 1985 Gobrecht Journal article, but somehow NGC followed Fivaz's designation....
Perhaps Fivaz's version got into his Cherrypicker's Guide, and NGC relied on that.
The case for 6 being the underdigits for both the main overdates was very strongly proven by Mark Sheldon in the 1999 Gobrecht Journal, using overlays of the 1846 and 1849 dates. Kevin Flynn essentially repeated this analysis in his 2014 book on Liberty Seated Half Dimes, reaching the same conclusion.
The current Red Book has even changed their descriptions of the overdates:
[V-2] "9 / Widely Placed 6".
[V-6] "9 / 6".
PCGS has been fairly consistent in the past at attributing:
However, perhaps they have become confused by the Red Book change, and possibly the Cherrypicker's Guide.
I see that several of the coins on their CoinFacts pages for 9/6 and 9/8 are incorrectly attributed.
This will create trouble for the PCGS graders / attributors, because those images are the best on the web.
PCGS can correct this by using my PDF guide (or Flynn's book), and switching to something like the descriptions used in the new Red Book for their slabs.
My descriptions "9 / Far 6" and "9 / Near 6" have the advantage of being different than the previous 9/6 and 9/8,
so people would know their slabs are the new versions.
While with the Red Book descriptions, the V-4 becomes 9/6, so that is identical to the old V-2, and people with a slab that just says 9/6 would not know (from the label) if it is a V-2 or V-4!
The same label advantage would apply if NGC changed their descriptions to mine as well.
Finally, "9 / Far 6" fits on the small real estate of the slab label more easily than "9 / Widely Placed 6".
I attribute the top 10 or so V-2, V-4, V-5 and V-6 coins in the rosters in the PDF, and list the serial numbers - easy to fix the CoinFacts listings using this, or just use the photos of the reverse cracks in the PDF to easily do it. Or see my post below, where I attribute each of the 24 coins.
Use the V- numbers to stop the confusion!
(The FS- numbers only cover the obverses, so they are unable to distinguish between V-2 and V-6, and they have been a source of trouble due to their reliance on the refuted 1985 article by Bill Fivaz).
This 1849 fiasco was the main reason I started making my PDF guides, and I made the 1849 guide first.
It's not that hard to read it.
Will update tomorrow.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Without a doubt...1849/6 H10C Redbook 9/6, latest Redbook “9 / Widely Placed 6”, Breen-3052, PCGS-4342, FS-302 (per Clint's ( @yosclimber ) Half Dime Attribution Guide, page 8 V-2.) https://web.stanford.edu/~clint/hdag/1849_half_dime_guide.pdf
...and a darn nice one too!
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
What yosclimber said.
TD
Well... that was interesting. Looking at the OP picture... and magnifying it... all prior to reading the rest of the thread, I was convinced it was a 9/8. Of course, this is not an area of expertise for me...@yosclimber ... Thank you for that very detailed reference information. Cheers, RickO
Bump for the update in 1st post.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Thanks, Clint, for the info pdf.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
As @yosclimber has indicated previously, the 1849/6 variety attribution at PCGS is a mess and should be divided up into the Valentine numbers versus FS (Fivaz / Stanton) numbers. Clint put together an extremely detailed booklet as mentioned in his post with lots of detailed images and pick-up points.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
Just got off the phone with customer service. The rep was extremely helpful and is forwarding the info to the attribution people.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I wonder if @MarkStephenson would interested in this?
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
Here are my specifics on attributions of the 1849 half dimes in PCGS CoinFacts:
Their current accuracy rate is 67%.
This could be easily improved by putting their 145432 spec (FS-302) under 4342 - it would fix 4 of the 8 errors.
I just sent them a message using the Contact page on PCGS CoinFacts.
Ha! The only AU58 in the list above is mine and it is incorrectly atttibuted!
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
@oih82w8 , we also discussed your 1849 V-6 in a couple of threads last summer. Here's one:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/985079/1849-h10c-am-i-wanting-to-see-the-overdate-ngc-specialist-does-not-brief-reply-from-ngc
(In this case, NGC struggled to attribute it).
Your coin now shows up as a PCGS MS-63, also misattributed in the above table. I noticed this when you posted it to the Liberty Seated images thread a few weeks ago:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/11899496/#Comment_11899496
V-6 is harder to attribute from the obverse, since it's a Later Die State.
And it's harder to attribute from the reverse, unless people use my PDF which shows its crack pattern.
Sure enough Clint. That MS63 is at CAC right now.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
PCGS recognizes varieties by subject matter experts; Sheldon, Newcomb and most recently Fortin for Seated Dimes, and others https://www.pcgs.com/varietyfaq . What would it take to get a Seated Half Dime specialist recognized (Valentine, @yosclimber has simplified or at least gave us something to chew on with his PDF)?
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
I believe PCGS, NGC, Heritage, Stack's-Bowers, etc. prefer to use the latest published attribution guides as sources for their attributions.
This is probably why the 9/8 is being used from the Cherrypicker's Guide.
They need to switch over to using Kevin Flynn's 2014 book, at least for the 1849 (it does not cover all varieties for all years).
Another way to proceed would be to ask Bill Fivaz if he accepts the later research on the under digits, and if he does, to change the description in the Cherrypicker's Guide. I don't know if there are any other specialists who judge that 9/8 is correct. @MrHalfDime is the leading expert, but he has often taken a friendly stance which simply says there is disagreement on what the underdigits are [But see below for clarification!]. This detail is not really needed to attribute the V- die marriage, since the reverse is much simpler to use. However, the description of the underdigits is important for people who have registry sets, and for people who like to collect by Red Book variety, etc.
I totally agree. It is imperative however for PCGS to make up their mind. They can't have identical coins in their holders attributed differently. I don't mean this in a mean spirited way, but it does affect their credibility.
In this case I could take the above TrueView'ed coins which are identical, and fill two different spots in the registry!
"Liberty Seated Half Dimes Complete Variety Set, Circulation Strikes (1837-1873)" calls for
both PCGS coins# 4342 and 145432.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
“@MrHalfDime is the leading expert, but he has often taken a friendly stance which simply says there is disagreement on what the underdigits are.”
Please do not misquote me on this, of all subjects. I am repeatedly on record as being solidly behind the opinion and writings of Tom DeLorey (CaptHenway on this forum) on the subject of the underdigits of the various 1849 half dimes. Mr. DeLorey has suggested in his July 1985 Gobrecht Journal Vol. 11, No. 33 article that all of the underdigits seen on the V1, V2, V4, V5, and V6 1849 half dimes are a 6 (or inverted 9). I emphasized this in my own thread, wherein I related how I was able to purchase the earliest die state that Mr. DeLorey and I have ever seen of the 1849/6 V2 half dime, from Tom DeLorey himself. I have even given presentations to the LSCC on this subject, wherein I quoted Tom DeLorey as saying “That coin certainly puts an end to the debate!” No, I have never vacillated on this subject. Perhaps the comment you attribute to me about disagreement on this subject refers to others, others who have not researched this variety, and who have not seen the indisputable EDS 1849/6 V2, after which there can be no disagreement.
Yes, sorry I misrepresented your position.
You have always been on the 9/6 side.
It's more of acknowledging that the debate exists among others and may not be resolved soon.
From your 2005 forum post:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/8742805/#Comment_8742805
There is a longer discussion in this 2007 thread:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/563664/new-1849-6-seated-half-dime-from-the-melville-ny-show-grading-opinions-welcomed
Do you know if Mr. Fivaz is still firmly on the 9/8 side, or if he finds the analysis of 1849 / 1846 overlays by Mark Sheldon and Kevin Flynn provide good evidence for 9/6?
Or if he has seen your V-2 VEDS coin?
If Mr. Fivaz could be brought over to the 9/6 side, that could really help stop the debate.
I checked the 1999 Gobrecht Journal by Mark Sheldon just now, and he actually focuses his analysis to only the V-4,
showing that it matches 1849 / 1846.
https://archive.org/stream/gobrechtjournalfn075libe#page/10/mode/2up
I believe Kevin Flynn used overlays for the V-2, but I don't have his photos at hand to share.
Did you ever get good pix of the 1849/6 V-2 VEDS? If so, post them here.
That would be fantastic.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
So, PCGS is sticking with 1849/8 FS-302? I was hoping to hear back from @MarkStephenson to see his opinion on this. He should have some influence, but may stay back in the shadows and let the "experts" handle this.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
Hmmm.... I have the NGC MS64 Eliasberg coin. Listed as 9/8. I recall looking at it a couple of years ago thinking it had the 9/6 diagnostics. Wonder what I should do with it?
Let's see what she looks like!
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
You're going to make me dig it out of the safe and scan it! Yikes-LOL! We'll see. I wish Stacks still had all their old auctions archived. I grab a pic there.
I'm still waiting for a response from PCGS. Nothing yet. I just sent an e-mail to make sure it doesn't fall off the radar.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
@okiedude, you might be be able to use the NGC slab verification function (scan, or key in the serial number). If you are lucky it might bring up a photo for your coin.
W. David Perkins Numismatics - http://www.davidperkinsrarecoins.com/ - 25+ Years ANA, ANS, NLG, NBS, LM JRCS, LSCC, EAC, TAMS, LM CWTS, CSNS, FUN
https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/lots/view/3-5WYRW
[The Stack's-Bowers auctions are archived back to about 2010, which is where I got this just now.]
NGC 367387-016
This is a V-2, tied for 4th in the roster for V-2 in my PDF. (I need to correct the 2012-6 price, though).
Easy to attribute from the reverse crack pattern (crack to right ribbon is V-2).
The slab label says 9/8 because that's what NGC uses, but in auctions it gets labelled V-2 and FS-302 which are correct.
If you want to use it in a registry set, I guess it would already work for a NGC set.
For resale you can write your own accurate auction description.
[duplicate]
@yosclimber thank you for all this detail. It will take several read through to get it. But from what I can see you have done more research then most on this topic. Great write up and you present you case well. I’m an excel wiz geek
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
UPDATE from PCGS..... I received this e-mail this morning:
So this is good news. It's being looked at and hopefully it will result in a permanent decision, hopefully 1849/6.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Let's get some good pictures of this date made for the record. You get the photographs done and I will pay for it.
TD
Here are the best photos I've seen for the overdate area of the V-2, 9/ Far 6
MS-67+ Stack's Bowers 2015-2 PCGS cert 30863456
MS-67+ (same coin as above; different lighting angle), PCGS CoinFacts/TrueView 2016-9
VF-30 PCGS CoinFacts PCGS cert 31609956
Amazing EDS example in Stephen Crain's reference collection; was sold to him by Tom DeLorey some years ago.
On most V-2 photos, the big loop of the 6 is not as plainly visible as in the above 3 photos.
Usually just a disconnected curve of the 6 may be visible.
This is why the most accurate attribution for V-2 and V-4 (plus V-5, V-6, V-1, etc.) uses the reverse cracks and the date position.
And here are the best photos I've seen for the overdate area of the V-4, 9 / Near 6
MS-67 Heritage 2014-6 Gardner PCGS cert 21348946
MS-67 PCGS CoinFacts PCGS cert 83794933
MS-68 PCGS CoinFacts ex-Simpson PCGS cert 06666580
The proof that the underdate is 1846 on both is by overlaying the 2 dates in a photo.
Mark Sheldon did this for the V-4 in his 1999 Gobrecht Journal article.
https://archive.org/stream/gobrechtjournalfn075libe#page/10/mode/2up
Kevin Flynn did this for both the V-2 and V-4 in his 2014 book.
Sure looks like a 6 to me. Or perhaps an upside down 9 (which would make a bit more sense).
Interesting thread to read and appreciate all the knowledge shared.
The "upside down 9" theory was tested. The inverted 9 is not the same shape as the 6 from 1846, so it does not produce the right shape for the under digit.
Another theory was that it was a sideways 9.
As it turns out, 1846 makes more sense than a repunched 9, because the Liberty Seated Half Dime dates were punched with a "gang punch" which has all 4 digits together. So if the 9 was upside down, the other 3 digits would be to the right. But they are to the left, with the remants of the old 4 under the new 4....
If single digit punches were used instead of a gang punch, then an inverted 9 could be feasible (except for the shape).
Here are the key images from Mark Sheldon's article, to make it a bit easier to compare then with the color photos above:
A similar overlay works for the V-2, where the 6 is lower.
Thanks for the fantastic photos!
Not only does the 6 have the squared off area, but look at the thickness of the crossbar of the 4. On the 1849 you can see the thicker crossbar of the underlying digit in the center of the 4.
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
Look at how wide the bottom half of that 6 is. That's why it swings out so far on the 1849/6 V-2.
I hope that something productive comes out of this, other than constructive conversation in this thread. IF these are reclassified, I doubt that the other attributed examples, right or wrong, will be corralled up and relabeled.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
I will keep everyone posted.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
It will happen at some point, since the Red Book has already made a reasonable correction to how these overdates are labelled.
And PCGS has demonstrated their interest in accurate attribution by adding Coin Numbers and labels for FS-302 and FS-301.
They just need improved labels at this point.
I don't know what their process is for changing labels for a Coin Number, or of they prefer to create new Coin Numbers for new labels, but either would do the job.
Then it would be up to people who hold the slabs to see if they want to send them in for new labels.
I had not noticed that the Redbook had changed the listing. I like the new listing.
I hope thst @ms70 has some good feedback for us that I can use to plead my case on my V-6.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
Everyone here will be the first to know.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I am indeed following this thread and have alerted certain of our experts about its existence. If I can publish any of our conclusions here, I will do so.
I will have to check that out.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
I am wondering if I sent my reconsideration package (letter of pick-up points and images of my1849/6 V-6) now if it would muddy up the water for @ms70 1849/6 V-2?
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
I still haven't heard anything, so either they haven't gotten to it yet or they're knee deep into it. Hopefully their awareness of all the amazing information just in this very thread will clarify all the varieties of 9/6 and 9/8. Your submission might actually further the research.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
@ms70 I will give my discussion paper one last look-over and send it to @PCGSCustomerService within a day or two.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...