Re: Tougher than you might think?
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "stevenamills"
> Putting together my type set has brought to mind several typeswhich
> I feel are probably scarcer than we might think. Please understand,know
> this is not an empirically proved, but just my impression after
> hanging around this crazy hobby for a number of years (I actually
> wrote a column for Error Trends BEFORE A.M. bought it - I don't
> why I mention this except to verify I'm OLD!).Wow. You do go way back.
>Very rare, except for partial counterbrockages. All of the partial
> Anyway, here's the list - would appreciate comments:
> True early counterbrockage
counterbrockages I've seen seem to be first-strike counterbrockages
with full peripheral lettering. Early stage, centered
counterbrockages are quite difficult to find.
> Early stage full brockageI agree that these are generally rare. However, in recent years,
full, centered, first-strike brockage/broadstrikes became quite
common among cents, and could be found in lesser numbers in nickels
and dimes. Those days are now past, unfortunately.
> Thick stock (dime on quarter etc.)Always scarcer than thin stock.
> Type I blanksQuite a bit rarer than Type II planchets. I'd say the latter
outnumber the former 20-to-1.
> Chain strikes - and their mated setsMated chain strikes are quite rare. Isolated chain strikes (half of
a pair) are not that hard to come by in cents and nickels, in my
> Double strikes - 1 on = 1 off - all die struckThese are indeed quite a bit scarcer than uniface off-center second
> Retained cudThese seem pretty common on the reverse of wheat cents. There are a
fair number known from the reverse of Washington quarters.
Scarcest of all are retained cuds associated with the hammer die.
The mystery is what holds them in place? It ain't the collar, that's