First Page
Previous Page
Replies: 77 / Views: 12,855
Posted Today 15M ago
Yep, they're very complicated years. I mispoke about the J punch, as I didn't mean to involve the 1882H yet. I'm purely concentrating on the 1881H for now.
I knew I was in for it when I found 10 die pairs after having gone through only 20 coins. It settled down a bit after that. I wouldn't be surprised if there were at least 50 die pairs. I knew there was someone conducting studies of the 1881 & 1882 but they obviously have remained unpublished and only available to a limited few for now. I may be able to publish the 1881 in the next couple months but I already know it won't be as complete as I would probably like. I usually have a sense that I have the 90-95% solution, because of sample size . But this study will require very high grade coins to do it justice, obviously problematic if sample size is insufficient. I think I've 've got about 60 on hand, none MS but a few AU, but I won't look at them until I think the study is reasonably complete - what I believe is the 80% solution in this case. It would be interesting to compare the results of two independent studies on this coin.
I doubt very much I will study the 1882. At a mintage of 4,000,000 I suspect that year would be brutal. I've got other more important coins of various denominations on my hit list.
BTW, I recently published the 1898H One Cent study I sent you few years ago. Its not quite the same since I made some amendments, and the sample size changed. You can access at https://substack.com/@classiccanadiannumismatics if you 'd like to check it out.
Rich
I knew I was in for it when I found 10 die pairs after having gone through only 20 coins. It settled down a bit after that. I wouldn't be surprised if there were at least 50 die pairs. I knew there was someone conducting studies of the 1881 & 1882 but they obviously have remained unpublished and only available to a limited few for now. I may be able to publish the 1881 in the next couple months but I already know it won't be as complete as I would probably like. I usually have a sense that I have the 90-95% solution, because of sample size . But this study will require very high grade coins to do it justice, obviously problematic if sample size is insufficient. I think I've 've got about 60 on hand, none MS but a few AU, but I won't look at them until I think the study is reasonably complete - what I believe is the 80% solution in this case. It would be interesting to compare the results of two independent studies on this coin.
I doubt very much I will study the 1882. At a mintage of 4,000,000 I suspect that year would be brutal. I've got other more important coins of various denominations on my hit list.
BTW, I recently published the 1898H One Cent study I sent you few years ago. Its not quite the same since I made some amendments, and the sample size changed. You can access at https://substack.com/@classiccanadiannumismatics if you 'd like to check it out.
Rich
