Does this look correct?

[jcuve]

Does this PCGS slabbed Linc look like 1909 DDO-002? I know the markers that are typically present are not on this coin, but if it was an earlier die state they may not be there anyway. What really does not look right to me is that the date does not appear to show class VI doubling. Am I crazy, or did PCGS get it wrong?

LINK (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140481058388&ssPageName=STRK:MESINDXX:IT)

[Brad]

I don't see any markers either. Looks normal to me.

1909 DDO-002
Designation:
2-O-VI;FS-01-1909-1102 (12.1)
VDB
Description:
Extra thickness on date with some separation on first 9
Grade:
MS64
Population:
12
Markers:
UVC-1212
DMR-007

Stage A:

Obverse is EDS
Reverse is RDV-001a (VDB) – EDS

Stage B:

Die chip upper B of LIBERTY – EMDS
Reverse is EMDS

Stage C:

Die chip whole B of LIBERTY – MDS
Die chip lower R of LIBERTY
Die clash N of CENT at throat
Reverse is MDS

Stage D:

Die chip whole R of LIBERTY – LDS
Reverse is LDS
Reported by:
Randy Miller

[DoubleYou]

First of all, this coin does display characteristics of class VI hub doubling. Secondly this is RDV-002. This can be told by the deep cuts in the N of UNITED. See http://www.varietyvista.com/Lincoln%20Cent%20Wheat%20RDV%20Changes.htm.
Therefore, this would have to be a different stage before EDS when the reverse die was changed, if this was DDO-002. However, that is unlikely. The doubling is less intense than DDO-002, showing best on IGWT, slightly on LIBERTY, and faintly on the date.

Having said that, I may be wrong, but the coin does not measure up to be DDO-002. The coin is beautiful nonetheless!

Wendell

[jcuve]

The design of the back being Wiles RDV-002 is a good observation Wendell when Wiles noted that DDO-002 was RDV-001a.

The one thing that really should be there is some nice distorted extra thickness on the 9s and the 0 in the date - of which I really detect none, especially not the amount exhibited on any of the three examples I have on hand.

[DoubleYou]

I've taken another look and I see that the coin is totally normal. I wasn't able to find a good comparison photo earlier, but now I have and see that what I was seeing was normal for the coin. Here is the link to my comparison photo. It is a beauty that I found on PCGS. Very large image and perfect quality photo. http://caimages.collectors.com/coinfacts/large/10638405.jpg

Wendell

[jcuve]

I wonder what the seller will say to my PM? PCGS slabbed it wrong...

[DoubleYou]

LOL! PCGS do something wrong! Wonder if he'll agree with you! It's terrible when a slabbing service misidentifies die varieties. Especially one that claims to only slab major varieties, and then lists a nonvariety as a major variety! You would think it was unmistakable!

Wendell

[jcuve]

I do not normally see slabbed coins in PCGS holders that are outright wrong. I have seen mis-attributions on various levels - recently there was that '72 DDO-004 mix up with what really turned out to be a DDO-007.

Really, this weird. It is not a Class VI DDO nor are there die markers that could be viewed as similar to those found on DDO-002 - so how did such a mistake happen? It had to start with a misidentification by a collector or dealer than was cemented as utter FAIL by PCGS. At least the grade is not off I guess...

[jfines69]

Counterfit maybe???

[CCC]

Counterfit maybe???

If it were a counterfit it would be the 2nd mistake PCGS made on this coin. Nice eye on this one Jason. Just picked up on the thread.

[jfines69]

If it were a counterfit it would be the 2nd mistake PCGS made on this coin. Nice eye on this one Jason. Just picked up on the thread.
With an error this big it is highly possible!!!

[DoubleYou]

The chances for this being a counterfeit coin is rather small. The pictures are high quality and everything looks exactly in line with how a real coin would.

Wendell

[trails]

I for one do not like the looks of the V. D. B.; it does not look right. But, then again, it could be me.

BJ Neff

[Cdiddle]

I agree with the V.D.B., that does not look correct.

[DoubleYou]

Maybe I'm wrong, so I'll just stay away.

Can't even trust verified slabs anymore for authenticity!

I'll stick to my wheat rolls.

Wendell

[jfines69]

I like wheat rolls... Especially with fresh made butter... LOL!!!

[CCC]

Maybe I'm wrong, so I'll just stay away.

Can't even trust verified slabs anymore for authenticity!

I'll stick to my wheat rolls.

Wendell


I agreee Wendell.

[DoubleYou]

I like wheat rolls... Especially with fresh made butter... LOL!!!

:LOL_Hair::sign10::LOL_Hair:

[dbrablec]

i posted images of this coin, which i had in my own stored coins. my coin matches ALL of the die markers listed on coppercoins site, as well, mr daugherty "photo verified" that i had the corredt coin (on a different forum). my images are not here right now, but if anyone is interested in seeing them, they sould be accessable in my very few older posts, or i could repost them later.

[dbrablec]

i just re read my previous post. my photos are not of the slabbed coin, in this post, they are of my own (non-slabbed) coin, from my own stored/hoarded coins.

[jcuve]

Here are some stage C & D pics:

http://i732.photobucket.com/albums/ww322/jcuve/1909P_DDO-002acopy.jpg

http://i732.photobucket.com/albums/ww322/jcuve/1909-DDO-002c-d.jpg

[roy]

maybe someone replaced that coin in that there slab????

[jcuve]

I have been communicating with the seller and I am thinking it is a mistake by PCGS. If I learn more I will chime back in...

[rlarick]

Any updates?

Here is my PCGS MS65RD FS-1102 DDO-2 as y'all call it.

gawd it hurts to resize to 500x500 lol

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z242/papasteeze/Coins/1909VDBDDOObversePCGSMS65RD14160254Type2Custom.jpg
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z242/papasteeze/Coins/1909VDBDDOReversePCGSMS65RD14160254Type2Custom.jpg