1969 Doubled Column ?

'Tis a can of worms, however, just as we at one time thought that "wavy steps" were confined to the single squeeze process, why not this anomaly?

Yes, it does look like a doubled column and it may have occurred in the same fashion as the "single squeeze hubbed" doubled columns that we so often see. I would contact John Wexler and see what he says about it.

My thoughts; I am equally split between a die gouge and a doubled column.

BJ Neff

I actually don't think it is the 'same' - first thing would be to look at a number of 1969 cents to be sure all of them don't have this blob to some extent. Second thing would be to make sure it can be rounded down to a single die, and is not a working hub or master die issue.

Then we get into the area of collectibility. Even if there is some chance that this is a minor doubled die, what is 'too minor' to be collectible, thus not really worth the effort of photographing and listing it. There are a large number of 'doubled column' coins that are listed in various systems that I think push the envelope of what is collectible and what is not.

Given that much of this is based on subjectivity and not pure objectivity, we all have decisions to make. I spent nearly two years working on listing every minor split serif RPM I could find, and nearly drove myself crazy with the issue...to what end? Now there are a number of listed dies that I wish weren't because it takes the fun out of collecting them trying to figure out which of five possible dies a $1 coin is, spending all day to identify a $1 coin. I'd rather spend my time finding, listing, photographing, and collecting coins that have some 'character'

It's not that I disagree that these doubled column coins are indeed some form of hub doubling. The point is that there are far too many of them and they are far too common as a single little blip on the coin's radar to gain effective attention by listing them and publishing the information. I'd rather be a source of information that at least 50% of the people who collect die varieties would care about, as opposed to being a source for people to have their names published because they found another flyspeck. Just my opinion.

With regard to doubled columns, I have taken the opinion that they are listable if obvious, out of the 'norm', and/or show doubling in more than one spot, i.e. doubled knees AND a column. Anything less will be rejected as 'too minor to list', a term I used to have objection to, but now see the point in using. It's a matter of listing 2,500 some-odd dies that at least 50% of the collecting public could have interest in or beating myself in the head to list, photograph, and house information for some 15,000 dies, over two thirds of which would confuse more people than they would help.

Thanks Charles, I see your point. I've likely have a couple hundred of these but only 4 or 5 that really impressed me. I'll keep them and chuck the rest.

Morgans Dad - Let me start by saying that I understand your sentiment - primarily because I used to have the same feeling. Basically I believed that every single flyspeck should be listed regardless of whether it was interesting. If it "is" then it "is" and it wasn't my job to be the judge of what should and should not be included.

Since then, however, I have taken nearly 20,000 photographs and have had a few years experience looking at a few hundred thousand coins, and have had the opportunity to either list and sell or see thousands of die variety coins listed for sale. I have also had the opportunity of answering some 15,000 questions from other collectors on the subject. All this together actually does give a person an authoritative overview of the market, people's interests, and a very good base knowledge of what the general majority of the collectors want to see. For those who do not know what they really want to see because they are too new to the hobby, sound and wise guidance is the key.

I have learned through the years that it can hurt the hobby more than help it by giving too much information to be correctly digested. It can confuse people when something is listed that takes a great deal of effort to identify. If frustrates collectors when they have perpetual holes in their collections because there are simply too many 'flyspeck' dies to collect to have a 'whole' set. Listing die varieties that would LIKELY be missed by most roll hunters works to the detriment of everyone...believe it or not. There HAS to be some "end" to what's collectible and what's not. When it gets to the point of needing a 30X microscope to identify one of 20 similar dies on some extremely minor die variety that would probably not sell for a premium to begin with, the whole thing loses its 'fun' factor. It's a responsibility of all authors and 'authoritative numismatists' to keep the hobby enjoyable, simple, and educational. We work hard to give the hobbyist knowledge, a sense of value in their collection, and a sense of accomplishment in being able to realistically complete goals. To top that, we don't get paid anywhere near minimum wage for doing all this.

So this is why we have specific guidelines as to what should be and what should not be listed in any die system. Some have different guidelines than others, which is why some have more die numbers than others. Some are happy listing the most popular or most visible 100 dies and leaving it at that. Others are more comprehensive, but even at that there has to be some point where a coin has something on it that's so minor people wouldn't spot it if they saw it, wouldn't buy it if offered, and wouldn't care whether or not they had one in their collection. I follow the more comprehensive route in my system, but still have my limits. Get the drift?

So basically, this isn't ME telling YOU what to collect and what not to collect. This is me taking a lot of experience, knowledge, suggestions, and common sense from that experience and giving the majority of collectors what they would rather see. I would never tell you not to collect something you want to collect. I would, however, tell you the truth when you asked me about value, collectible interest, and whether or not it warrants attention and two hours to photograph it and list it. I give advice here based on 25 years of doing this - I'm no spring chicken to die varieties, and all the coins I've seen, all the questions I've seen and responded to, and all the actual hands-on work I've accomplished in web development, database design, book layout, and photography give me a high-level understanding of what should and should not be listed.

Take to heart what I offer here with the understanding that I personally know most of the other current book authors and know their opinions. I know well over a hundred experienced collectors and know their opinions. I'm not going at my decisions alone; I can comfortably say that my decisions, answers, and opinions closely follow those of others with my level of experience in the hobby.

The only thing I can say to follow up on that is this:

I used to share your excitement over everything, no matter how small. I used to poke at the experts because they didn't know 'this' or 'that' was out there, or that they were keeping their information to themselves to make money. I used to be a cocky young collector with nothing but criticism to offer because 'they' hadn't listed every single die that ever existed and published a book I could buy to see all of them. So in effect, your criticism is extremely mild compared to what I used to offer to those who had been doing this for years.

Then I started doing it myself. I was going to list everything, and I was going to offer everything for free, and I was going to 'save the collecting world'. Well, let me tell you....10 years of listing die varieties, spending all night and long hours with my back killing me over a microscope, then hour after hour spent writing, editing photos, fielding questions, answering posts - 10 years of all that tends to 'jade' one's opinion about what's 'too minor' to bother with. Try it and you'll find out the same way I did.

I have put no fewer than full-time employment time into this hobby over at least the past ten years, and have nearly nothing to speak for it financially. I have given away ten times what I've ever made at it and have been dirt poor through the whole thing. I'm not rich, I don't have money. All I have is a passion to share what I love - coin collecting - in my own way. Answering questions is something I do about two hours every day of my life, and I don't get a dime for it. Attributing a package of ten coins takes an entire day - yes, an entire day - and I get $30 for it. I spend 10-15 hours a week looking through rolls of coins to find new stuff to photograph, and often get absolutely nothing in return for my time, because finding ANYTHING worthwhile takes a serious investment of time. It's support of the hobby that keeps me going.

PLEASE...try to have understanding and compassion for those who have chosen to take collecting to the next level - the true numismatists (scientists of coins) who have spent a lifetime studying and publishing their finds. The people who pay their own way to take trips just to learn more so they can share more. There's only so much time in a person's life, and after you've spent ten years of yours photographing every doubled die and RPM you have found or that has been sent your way so you can share that information with everyone for free, you'll understand...really.

People like J.T. Stanton, Bill Fivaz, Michael Fey, Jeff Oxman, John Wexler, James Wiles, B.J. Neff, Bob Piazza, Ken Potter, Mike Diamond, Bill O'Rourke, Mike Ellis, Billy Crawford....all have two things in common other than just coins. I know all of them, respect all of them, and I can tell you firmly that ALL these people agree on this one thing that you and I don't agree on...There ARE doubled dies and repunched mintmarks that are simply too minor to mess with....and a LOT of them.

Please don't get me wrong here. I am explaining a position that MANY experienced numismatists share. Once you gain a few years experience and find your bookshelfd clogged full of 'stuff' you once thought was 'important', you'll take inventory and toss out more than half of it because you too will know. So I guess I'm not worried about your position - we all once shared it. It's something that will grow on you over time. The one thing I hate to see is the people who never learn the difference, keep the stuff until death, and their heirs have to find out the hard way that their loved one's collection is worth only a tiny fraction of what they imagined. As long as you know the good ones and keep them too, you will be fine...just don't focus so much on the little things. It's a hard lesson to learn, but I would rather coax you now than have you (or yours) learn the hard way later.

Don't give a hoot about the hijacking Charles. Since I don't collect these cents, send them to a young lad up in Virginia, I'd rather send him a few worth while coins than a hundred pieces of junk. As for the coin that started this topic, I think I'll just hang onto it untill I've seriously checked a couple hundred more 1969s. Thanks for the advice.

It just takes time...experience cannot be gained any other way. I don't know whether I should welcome you to the passion or feel sorry for you that you have the same sickness the rest of us are afflicted with, but nonetheless you are one of us and will pave your own road and make your own sense of things to come. If I can help you pave it better or faster I see no harm in the time spent to help. Just ask.