David Quint wrote:
In response to Winston Zack's comments on capped bust dime rarity
ratings: In going back and reviewing the correspondence between myself
and the 5 other specialists listed in the Census related to the recent
changing of rarity ratings, the varieties that were "nominated" but for
which there was not enough of an opinion to change ratings were the
1811, the 20 JR9, the 21 JR4, the 1829 JR1, JR5, and JR9, the 33 JR6 and
the 35 JR2. So Winston's 8 suggestions were not discussed by us; I
think this serves to highlight the vast difference in opinions that are
out there and the difficulty involved in making adjustments to rarity
ratings when the data set is so far from complete. My own preference
would be to formally discuss changes in rarity ratings once every couple
of years, when the Census is being done, and certainly I would welcome
Winston and his nominations and insight into any future dime census that
I'm involved in. One thing about these changed rarity ratings is that
each of us can use them, or not; but outside of our small group of
dedicated variety specialists I'm not sure that there is an outside
impact to our agreed-upon ratings. The major auction houses, to my
knowledge, still only use the original 1984 rarity ratings, some of
which we ALL agree were mistaken. To the extent that the catalogers
begin to use our changes it will increase the importance of the process.
But for now, the importance to me of the updated rarity ratings is
simply to serve as a guide based on the collective experience of a half
dozen specialists, to be used, or not, by collectors looking for some
guidance as to relative rarity. While the process we use today to
determine our final rarity ratings is far from scientific, I would argue
that neither was the process used by the EUSD authors; given that today
we have more information than they had, it is surprising to me that
Heritage and Stack's Bowers do not use the updated rarity ratings (as a
dime specialist, I don't even know if they use updated ratings for other
series).
David Quint
------
Mike Sherrill wrote:
Hi, this is a response to Winston
Zack’s questions about capped bust dime rarity.
Because each person sees a different
subset of the extant specimens of a particular die variety, each person has a
different idea of their rarity and relative rarity. Once I suggested to Russ
Logan when he was compiling the JRJ census that each person also include an
estimate of rarity for the die marriage, in addition to the grades of the
specimens they owned. It doesn’t have to be granular to the
“+” or “-“, just R3 or whatever. The important number
will be the average of these estimates as more and more people participate.
In addition, an estimate of rarity for a
die marriage contributes to a total number of coins that survive for the entire
denomination, and this needs to be consistent with expected survival rate. I
thought the author’s estimate of the total number of capped dimes was
given in EUSD, but I was not able to locate it. The rarity for every capped
dime variety, with only 1 or 2 notable exceptions, is probably at least 1
‘R number’ too high, because I believe more capped dimes have
survived than previously thought.
More definitive rarity ratings can also be
obtained by compiling lists and photo archives of known examples, especially
for the rarer die varieties. This has been done successfully with the curl base
2 dime variety by Louis Scuderi and the 1824 dimes by Jim Koenings. I believe
this is where the revised R2 rarity rating was obtained for 1824 JR1. I am
attempting to compile lists for 1820 JR4 and 1820 JR12. I am aware of four
previously unknown examples of 1820 JR12 in the last 8 months, and I felt the
marriage was R5+ before this. Rarities of 1821 JR2 as R6+ when 16 examples are
included in the census, as well as 1827 JR2 as R5+ when Jim lists approximately
45 examples in his book, are a bit inconsistent, since we are certain
additional examples exist. My personal feeling is none of 1821 JR2, 1833 JR3,
or 1820 JR12 have a rarity higher than R5+ at this time.
I would like to take this opportunity to
thank our host Richard Meaney for managing this forum, and David Quint for all
his efforts on the recent dime census.
Mike Sherrill
------
Robert Stark wrote:
Attendance at the Baltimore Show on Thursday seemed good--but not overwhelming. The number of dealers seems to expand. Seeking early dollars, I found more than usual this time. One prominent figure told me that we may see more coins offered at shows vs auctions as sellers sense a better return. If the JRCS met on Friday--it would be good to have a report from an attendee.
Bob Stark
------
Mike Sherrill wrote a second time:
Below is a scan of a very late die
state 1828 JR2 dime I acquired last year. The coin appears to have a retained
cud on the reverse between the die cracks listed in EUSD. All detail is gone in
this area all the way to the scroll, except a ghost of E2 in STATES can be seen
with good light and tilting. Much of the wear on the reverse seems to have been
absorbed by this area suggesting it was somewhat raised. The obverse just to
the right of the date also shows a bit of weakness and is just opposite D STATES
on the reverse. The die crack at A2 is present but cannot be seen in the scan. The
dies did not appear to be rotated relative to one another when striking this
coin, so the die rotation shown in the scan is accidental. I’m curious if
anyone else has seen this late die state for 1828 JR2.
Mike Sherrill
(Editor's note: Click on the image to open a larger version)
