1919 Double Dot imposter?

[autocoupler]

Spotted this in the PCGS population report. Can't see any sign of the cud on right side of O in OF, and appears to be no moat around either dot. 

I think someone may be disappointed.

[Basilstate]

Yes,'false double dot',they bob up every so often,i can't see the 'dash' over the 'A' either.
Both lower and upper dots are too far to the right as well.

IIRC 'Robiegal' on here had one and apparently purchased it from a well known Melb. Dealer which is a shame.

[nealeffendi]

Remind me what the P in PCGS stands for???
That rookie mistake might cost someone buying it without closer examination a few thousand dollars. What happens when they or their heirs find out the truth? Whomever originally slabbed it might be dead/retired or otherwise not in a position to correct the mistake. Will PCGS correct the mistake and if compensation is sought then on what value? Bluesheet/Redsheet/Renniks/McDonalds or PCGS own guess? Can't be many in that grade changing hands so would be difficult to gauge the market.

[echidna]

Check the surfaces and there are all sorts of dots everywhere.
A high res image of the top dot would be interesting.

[Basilstate]

Check the surfaces and there are all sorts of dots everywhere.
A high res image of the top dot would be interesting.

Yes Echi,these Coins were ID as Dot under way back in the 1960's(70's?),the top 'dot' is a die chip of some kind.

Always apprehensive 2nd guessing PCGS with the exotic gear they have to analyse Coins but there are several egs of this variety kicking around,especially in the early days of Ebay before the genuine Double Dots took over and the punters were educated.

[autocoupler]

A high res image of the top dot would be interesting.

The PCGS number is 47091054. The true view image is better.

[fred lever]

Hi Guys, I checked over my notes on the 1919 and the reference papers, ( Briggs, Saxton, Holland ect.) to clue myself back in to the variety.
I had gone totally blank!
I also sharpened up the reverse image and equalised the light values with photoshop, "turned on the lights" as it were so i could see it better.

Noted:
The reverse die has developing cracks across the date from left peg through the date to right peg and further to the "A".
Also a crack starting between the T and H at the top.
The scrolls are well pressed.
The dots positions on this die are not where they are on the one die that I, and most researchers,  think,  was the only used.
I looked through my gallery of DBLDOT coins to compare, on this coin his top dot is way to the right, wrong shape. (Not an oval shape and quite tight to the scroll.)
The bottom dot is sort of about the right shape but a bit lower.
The cracks about the top A are not evident.

All of that makes me agree with you all , its a DUBS coin with a "fortunate dot" ( die chip or bronze mound) at the top that just happens to be in the right area.
Because it does not comply with the accepted "Standard" it's either a fortunate dot or a lone unicorn survivor from another die pair and we need to do a re-write!
Find another identical one!

I tried looking through my gallery of DUBS reverses hoping to find a match with the same cracks through the date area but no luck.
That does not surprise me as I only have hundreds of images as against millions of coins, but you never know unless you look.

I would be wary, it is a double dotted coin but not the same as the herd,  they ALL show identical dot shapes and positions.
The only coins I have, where the dots are different, like the coin in question, were fakery or fortunate.

My written reference was article, Lever, "The 1919 penny, dates dots and duds"  CAB Sep 2013 vol16 issue 8.


Cheers, Fred.

[echidna]

https://benchmarkcoincatalogue.com/coin/457?pg=102

[Basilstate]

This is the Benchmark Coin,different Rev. to the OP Coin.
Die is on its last legs by the look of things,Top Dot is debateable,could be anything but its not round to my eyes..

   

[autocoupler]

Thanks for the Benchmark pic echidna and Basil. When comparing the reverses of the PCGS coin and the Benchmark coin I believe they are the same. To me, the PCGS coin is an earlier die state with the die cracks being in the same position but not as pronounced.

[fred lever]

In post #7 i said "find an identical one".
Well there we go. You have.
We have 2 coins from the same die.
The dots on those two are the same to each other, but very different to the accepted DD single die.
Agree with Auto, same die just advanced cracking in the benchmark example.
The crack at the top TH also extends from the H to the O and you can see stress marks further around.
UhOh I better dig out my box with the 1919's and have a second look at my "suspect dud" DD examples!

Basil, under a scope at  high magnification the top dot on my DD examples is quite oval as if the punch skidded or chattered when marking the die.
The lower dot is quite round.
I dont have a benchmark type example to scope, but from the picture both dots are different in shape, the bottom dot is oval shaped and the top dot a smaller punch and struck well in creating a crater, that produces the "moat" when reversed onto the struck coin.

I wonder if there more identical around?
Looks like we have a second DD die  identified.

Fred.

[Basilstate]

Yes Fred,on the accepted DD top dot,as the Die wore the edges of the dot depression on the Die seemed to break/wear away increasing the 'dot' in size and causing it to go from round to nearly oblong.

This variety was ID 50 years ago as a 'Dot Under Die Chip' , that view may be wrong but its the one i grew up with.

Robbiegal posted a Pic. on here of hers which was similar to the 2 above,i can't find it thru the search function but someone may have the time to locate it.
IIRC she purchased from Klaus Ford(?) in Melb. as a 1919 DD.

Edit..i think this is RG 'double dot',listed on my old computer as such.

[autocoupler]

OK, just say for the time being there are two double dot reverses of the 1919 penny.

Considering the relatively fully formed top scroll on the Benchmark coin, would it be fair to say that the die failed fairly quickly, and was replaced by the D.D. die we have all come to know as the genuine double dot?

Would this then make the Benchmark reverse die the scarcer of the two?

[nealeffendi]

There was only ONE 1919 .//. die. Any others are false.
The 1919 .//. is distinct as it has the same obverse die as a 1919 FBL. So it was possibly (probably?) the first of the cloned reverses which might account for it having 2 dots.

[serenitystan]

Two 1919 double dots from the same die. The Benchmark coin graded by NGC and the other one by PCGS. Big call by NGC to name it a double dot and maybe PCGS just followed..Defective die or genuine???.