2019-P Ma Quarter WDDR-Tbd With Die Chips

I'm not seeing a DDR in that image, possibly a circulation hit.

Thanks for the input folks. Correct, it is not a WDDR-001. Here are two more pics to see if the same responses are found.

Appreciate the input Tanman! Good to hear another has been identified. Do you recall of it had the large amount of chips also?

@ TAN: Long time, happy to be here again. Hope every thing go well.

Now, for this coin me I see some hub doubling and die chips. What you think?

Good question, good point. Is not how me I see, but could be a good debate for those modern coins.

What you ask me in fact (what I believe your vision) you want to assimilate the hub doubling with the DD's classes. Me I do not parallel like this. Reasons:

On those coins the Hub Doubling go back to the Master Die (so the Working Hub has the doubling from Master Die).
Second: The actual Working Dies are result of a single squeeze to be produce, so for me those categories (classes) work for DD's before 2000.

You put a very interesting point which I think must be a good debate not only on the forums but also to different conventions. will be done?, hard to say. The most youngers collectors and passionate of the hobby do not seem to go on this hard route to analyze, to calculate, put a big amount of time. It is where we live now. For me which I litigate for making a difference between different kinds of strikes attached to different years, I has answers (85%) as the old vision : "From 50 years is like this" , which I do not agree a second. If I keep thinking like 50 or 100 years ago, I will not be able to wrote this message here.

Hope Help.

I agree with Silviosi, the class system best works for the multiple-squeeze era doubled dies and not the modern ones whatsoever.

I believe most people would either categorize this into Class VIII tilted hub doubling (like Wexler) or into Class IX shifted/single-squeeze hub doubling (like CONECA and error-ref). I don't find either of these classifications really satisfying as one doesn't acknowledge the differences in doubled dies from the multiple-squeeze process to the single-squeeze process whatsoever and the other does recognize this but then lumps all of the single-squeeze doubled dies into one category. Though the error-ref article does mention there are at least two types of 'Class IX' doubled dies which I believe is true. I think if these two types were split into separate classes I'd find that a fairly practical and up-to-date classification system.