Weak Strike Vs Wear, How To Tell

quote:

---

I'm feeling somewhat devilish today !

Here is one to test the info above with ,,weak strike or wear ?

If the date Helps its a 1899-O

---

I've got a pretty firm opinion, but I'll hold on to it for a bit.

Metalman: Looks like strike weakness to me because the dentils and legend seem untouched. But my main reason is that it's a New Orleans coin, which, if I understand correctly, are almost always weakly struck.

Thanks coop for taking the trouble to post such an interesting and informative post. longnine also makes a similar and very important distinction between weak strike and worn dies. This is something that has been sort of mulling around in my mind but I had not yet worked out that there's a distinction. Thanks to you guys for helping me understand this!

quote:

---

weak strike or wear

---

I would say neither. The strike looks full and there don't appear to much wear from circulation. So I might place a different card that is face down. I would say die wear is what is making the feathers on the breast to look weak/worn. But the die is at fault, not the light strike cause I feel it is sufficient. And wear seems to be missing on other details. Wear from die I think that is why the breast feathers are weak.

While I am still very much the novice at this hobby, the thing that stands out to me is how nice the cotton bolls look on this coin. I also see no wear in the cap. It's almost like the hair above the ear exhibits a Grease Filled Die like you see on coops' Lincolns, but I would still have to guess at a weak strike.

With the exception of the three "noticeable" marks on the obverse (jaw line, below the U, and very straight cut above the ear), this is a very clean looking obverse. I still can't imagine that this has seen circulation. I just hope my "rookie" status having not quite made a year yet in this fine sport isn't showing too bad....lololol

I'll speculate that it's both. If my speculation is a disaster, hey, I can always get a bail out from Benny & The feds. Go Benny go!

The stars on the obverse are flat and so is the eagle's breast and the hair above the ear. But hair above the ear also looks like it has wear.
And besides, aren't New Orleans notorious for weak strikes?

I started this topic to help me in general, but this piece is the specific one I have major questions about. It is in a NGC holder, I got it on e-bay a long while ago.






The breast of the eagle has virtually no detail and the talons are flat, and the hair above the ear, and the ear itself is flat. Ido like the coin, because on the reverse it has pitting around the OL, polishing lines across the tail, and die cracks at the left wing tip and across TAT in states, while the obverse has a series of Cuds from the N of Unum to the second star, with some evidence of Cuds all along the rest of that edge. I assume it is a VAM, but I am not up to the 1900's yet. Anyone want to guess what NGC gave this?

MS61?

"Unless they thought it was a super weak strike."

Wouldn't it be nice then if they explained themselves? Don't you have the right to all the information that was produced in grading your coin when it was you who paid for it?

I'm not talking about future technology here. Codes and abbreviations have been around for centuries and they can be put on slabs so collectors can figure out what's what.

Unless of course, TPGs don't want collectors to figure it out.