Rob

I remember Colin Cooke saying he had an example with the plug on one side only. He also had one with 2 plugs. Just thinking off the top of my head, it is possible that counterfeits could be made a lot more efficiently by making a small depression as part of the casting mould and hammering in a small piece of copper. I don't know if they were made in this way, but it would be easy. I have a counterfeit tin halfpenny where there is the shape of the plug in the detail, but no actual plug in place and of course the edge doesn't have an inscription. It is also obviously cast.

No, it's got a single stop between ON & CA, that's why I suggested 4a.

Not my strongest subject given the absence of halfpennies. I make this Richard 1st class 4a based on the pellet beard. Does that sound about right? Moneyer is GOLDWINE ON CA which would tie in with known strikings. Thanks.

Brooker didn't have one and Michael Sharp didn't record it in his article, so it's probably like a lot of other things which are recorded in individual auction catalogues or on dealer's lists. Until someone incorporates them into a major new reference similar to Withers small change series which gains rapid acceptance, all these items remain "unrecorded". It is quite a logical variety given that there couldn't have been too much time between the end of the anchor mark and the use of the G1 bust, and two appearing at the same sale in different lots suggests commoner than you may think.

EXCELLENT NEWS. These CGS slabs are much easier to break into. Just run a pair of pincers around the edge rim and prise the two halves apart with your thumbnail. There is much less chance of damaging the coin than with NCG or PCGS slabs.

I couldn't agree more.

Why does it always happen that when you find one rarity another appears almost immediately. Here's another one for the list. G1/1 with triangle/triangle over anchor. A die pairing that wasn't in Brooker or Michael Sharp's article. Lot 656 at London Coins this weekend was incorrectly described as a Briot reverse, but was in any case a die pairing I haven't seen before with this not particularly aesthetically pleasing example. Obviously having been dug it was pitted and clipped, but as far as I am aware still unrecorded with the G1 bust linked to an earlier reverse which Michael Sharp only records as being paired with busts F3-6. 13 lots later there was a second example except for this time it was triangle over triangle over anchor on the reverse. This piece is a bit ragged and in lower grade but visually much nicer and only slightly underweight at 5.95g.

I hope you told him so! Certainly did

Apparently the person behind it is Alex Anderson, obviously in association with London Coins. Had a good chat with him about it today at the auction and bought a few pieces. Although I hate the idea of slabs, the assigned grades for what was on offer today was more accurate than the usual fare. I'll still break them out though.

If slabbing existing coins doesn't take off, what's the betting we see attempts to create an artificial market (in that one doesn't exist in the UK, unlike in the US) for 'perfect' modern coins? If they can create a demand for something only they can provide maybe they might just make money after all!. You can already make money with the perfect coin as the "best known piece" market bears out. It has always been the case. The only difference is that you can personally verify it is the perfect coin when it isn't encased in plastic, because there ain't no way I'm going to trust any grading company which by default has a vested interest in keeping it's customers happy. These by definition are the people supplying the coins for slabbing and not the buyers of slabbed coins.

I think the seal is supposed to be Canada

But I've just listed over 200 items you could buy

You could have pictures of higher grade coins in many instances as most of the coins types I've listed I have in mint state or at least EF because the coins I've put on so far are duplicates together with a few pieces where I've thinned the ranks a bit. On the second point I'll have a think about it when I'm closer to being finished, but everything is certainly listed and numbered because Mr VATman requires records to be kept and this is being done as a serious venture rather than a sideline.

No problem. Get a list together of what you are looking for and I'll see what else I've got. Regards whether they are all 300dpi - god knows but they were all taken with the same camera settings, although the auto focus falls down on some darker pieces. So the answer is probably yes. I'm having to wrestle with a new camera, not to mention the monotony of entering lines of programming; neither of which I am particularly adept at.

Well spotted. When I put the descriptions in order I forgot to move the price too. There's a few obvious copy and paste errors, but on the whole not too bad. The main thing was to get something on every page and worry about padding it out later.

Just ask for the pictures you need and add courtesy of Rob Pearce with a link to my website www.rpcoins.co.uk. It's up and running, but not finished yet. It will be by the time you need them.

There are a number of 1901 1/2ds in this condition.

The fields have clearly been polished but the rims are not to proof standard which is usually wider, flat and has a sharp right angle with the edge. The legend doesn't look crisp enough either. The lettering on proofs is quite angular with flat surfaces and straight edges are sharp where the relief changes height, whereas on currency pieces these sharp angles soon get rounded and you tend to get surface imperfections. Both are features you should look for. The Ls in the picture below demonstates this. Still a nice coin though.

I think you could be right Chris. I personally don't like to draw or make notes in any of my books. I can see the point if it is a new collector wishing to collect a certain type or a date run, but still I'm sure they could just as easily jot their info down on a note book or something. Signed copies are a good Idea I know I'd buy one. How much for a signed copy of Collectors' Coins Great Britain 2007 edition as I haven’t got it yet? I find it imperative to make notes in a reference book because there are so many varieties for the same date that you need to know which ones you have. Having said that, it can get a bit confusing when the book is second hand and there are two collections listed. But at least that saves defacing two books.

A few images of coins with arrows showing where the high points are and consequently the first points to show wear would help a lot of people. e.g. 2/6ds from 1902-27 always lose the I & P of the garter legend first along with hair detail or the best indicator of wear to George III shillings from 1816 is the harp breast. It should be conical to a point if mint state and always wears flat, so the wear is proportional to the size of flat surface. Much better than the lions which can suffer from die blockage or wear due to their irregular surface shape and fine detail.

I often wondered whether some sort of interactive grading website would be good... maybe like a game or quiz. It could show you a coin, you select what grade you think it is, it tells you how you fit in with opinion so far (or expert opinion, or whatever). There could be a link to somewhere to write comments where people could discuss the grading. In fact, what I have described could probably be done with the voting mechanism on the forum, although it would get a bit cumbersome with a thread for each type of coin in each grade. Still, it could provide a useful resource for us all (especially for less common types) and it would be interesting to see the things that different people look for when grading. I like this idea and think there could be some mileage in it. Have a feeling though all graders should be anonymous, as there could be a tendency to undergrade out of sheer machismo! I don't think undergrading is likely to be a problem. All people have to do is be honest with themselves, look at the coin objectively and properly scrutinise it for wear, then take an ego-free path and give an accurate assessment. It will of course help them if they have seen both high and low grade examples previously.

Good to see your spelling is as correct as the grades offered by the slabbing companies. Very well put.

Looking at your image of the date, it looks as if there could possibly be a trace of the outside edge of a flat topped 4 above and slightly left of the top left corner of the 5. This would tie in to the vertical of the 4 which would agree with the slightly left inclined blockage in the top gap of the 5 and the vertical displacement would be about right too. My perception of the underlying bit is that the 4 if it is that, is slightly rotated acw.

I'm not aware of any references to this as an overstrike, that's why I asked if anyone had a mint state example on an earlier thread. Preferably an early strike too so that there is less chance of die wear.

Is the 1835 a 5/4? I don't know Rob here's a pic. What do you think? I know what is realy obvious is that it has a large die crack running from the last l to the s in gulielmus. Totally inconclusive. I think they are both struck from the same obv. die as my piece has a thin flaw from the top right serif of the U to the border bead only following the same path as yours as well as the very faint flaw joining the base of the M & U that is slightly arched. So mine is just an earlier strike. Also, your 3 is slightly defective on the right hand side of the lower loop to a greater extent than on mine. The features of what appears to be an underlying 4 on mine is best seen with the light coming from 12 o'clock, which highlights what would be the angled bar just outside the 5 vertical but doesn't follow the 5 shape where it changes direction and enters the tail of the 5 in the middle of the end. Also, the cross bar rises slightly from left to right. The little spur which joins the tail of the 5 to the angle perfectly bisects the angle of the possible 4. There are traces of what would be the serifs on the foot of the 4 in the loop and as a very small protrusion on the outside of the loop. Picture added to show what I mean, the right hand of the foot is not as prominent as the drawing suggests.