Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

THUNDRLIPZ
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:35 am
Contact:

Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by THUNDRLIPZ » Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:57 pm

Hi. I am sure this is somewhere on here but here is my question. Just to be clear, what are the translation numbers for the following:

1971-S FS 103, FS 106 and 1972-S, 1973-S FS-101 in Wexler's catalog system? Thanks.

Konstantinos
Ever Dance with the Devil by the Pale Moon Light?

BillSanders

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by BillSanders » Tue Jan 03, 2012 8:57 am

Hi Konstantinos,
Just to be clear, what are the translation numbers for the following:

1971-S FS 103, FS 106 and 1972-S, 1973-S FS-101 in Wexler's catalog system? Thanks
Good Question and one that (along with others) has caused The Ike Group to write our books.
1- 1971-S FS 103: (WDDO-008,-009-010-011) IkeGroup 71-S Collectible Die Family Grouping 71S-SP-1
IN THE "Little Book of Eisenhower Dollars" it is summarized in 8 pages (from "The Big Book") as Ch 1. See: http://ikegroup.org/71Sfs103draft.pdf
2- 1971-S FS 106: WDDO-022
IN THE "Little Book of Eisenhower Dollars" it is summarized in 5 pages (from "The Big Book") as Ch 2. See Lees FS106 pictures at: http://ikegroup.org/php3.0.2/phpBB/view ... dee499c8b5
3- 1972-S FS 101: WDDO-009 + ? IkeGroup 72-S Collectible Die Family Grouping 72S-SP-1
IN THE "Little Book of Eisenhower Dollars" it is summarized in 5 pages (from "The Big Book") as Ch 5. See: http://ikegroup.org/72Sfs101draft.PDF
4- 1973-S FS 101: WDDO--004-009 + ? IkeGroup 73-S Collectible Die Family Grouping 73S-SP-1
IN THE "Little Book of Eisenhower Dollars" it is summarized in 8 pages (from "The Big Book") as Ch 6. See: http://ikegroup.org/73Sfs101draft.pdf

Hope this helps. We have been trying to identify the Working Dies that the TPG’s are certifying for several years. As you know they hold this information close so we have to look at the coins we get back (from the TPG’s). The TPG’s are not "always" consistent in their attributing of varieties.

Bill

(P.S. I will have copies of “The Little Book” available at my table #574 at the Fun Show for $12)

THUNDRLIPZ
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:35 am
Contact:

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by THUNDRLIPZ » Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:06 am

Thanks Bill.

To date, has anyone found similar family doubled dies to the DDO-022 (FS-106) similar to finding the family of DDO-008, 009, 010, & 011?

Konstantinos
Ever Dance with the Devil by the Pale Moon Light?

User avatar
19Lyds
Posts: 1148
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by 19Lyds » Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:27 pm

I disagree with calling the FS-103 1971-S Wexler's DDO-008, DDO-009, DDO-010, and DDO-011 if that is what's being implied. It's actually the CONECA DDO-003 with the closest representation being Wexler's DDO-008 which actually cross references the DDO-003 ( 3-O-V ).
Yes the dies are often confused but they are not the same.
I cannot and will not be held responsible for my typing errors as it appears that there is a bug in the keyboard!
........I've tried on numberous occasions to fix the problme but it just keeps coming back agin and again! -L. Lydston 2008

THUNDRLIPZ
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:35 am
Contact:

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by THUNDRLIPZ » Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 am

In the end, the FS numbers concerning doubled dies are really just non-sense. There is no way to really be sure what is what and as a result, TPG's should really not be labeling and confirming them as such without further work being done to ensure that what is labeled and attributed is proper.
Ever Dance with the Devil by the Pale Moon Light?

User avatar
19Lyds
Posts: 1148
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by 19Lyds » Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:09 pm

THUNDRLIPZ wrote:In the end, the FS numbers concerning doubled dies are really just non-sense. There is no way to really be sure what is what and as a result, TPG's should really not be labeling and confirming them as such without further work being done to ensure that what is labeled and attributed is proper.
At the very minimum, the author of the document that identifies the specific DDO should attribute that DDO or DDR before the submission goes to PCGS.

When called on my 71-S FS-103, I forwarded the coin to James Wiles who concurred that it was not DDO-003. James could also validate the 71-S DDO FS-106, 71-S DDR FS-801 and 73-S DDO FS-101.

The 72-S DDO FS-101 could be validated by John Wexler.

OR, Tom K could validate any of the above.

Often times, if a TPG "Minor Varieties" one of the above which the submitter believes is one of the attributable DDO/DDR coins, an attribution letter from a qualified attributer which shows the TPG Cert Number is enough to get the coin properly attributed.
I cannot and will not be held responsible for my typing errors as it appears that there is a bug in the keyboard!
........I've tried on numberous occasions to fix the problme but it just keeps coming back agin and again! -L. Lydston 2008

THUNDRLIPZ
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:35 am
Contact:

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by THUNDRLIPZ » Tue Jan 10, 2012 10:31 pm

Lee, very valid point.

But what I must be continously losing the ability to understand is how can any attributor really identify, for example, a 1972 FS-101 when no one really knows what it is? That is, and just following this logically... we have a picture of a motto... this motto purporting to tell us what a 1972 FS-101 looks like. Great. Now, we have multiple mottos on a 1972 that have that same motto (or at least darn close). But, we have dies that we know are different (various markers, etc that help to distinguish).

As a result, no one can really attribute a coin as a FS-101 (for example) based on that one photo. No one. So other than a really cool doubled die that has value in and of itself and is extremely difficult to locate, etc... we do not really know it is this or that. Just something you don't see that easily and is a great doubled die and the such.

What I truly believe we should do (well, really those that do the research or have tremendous knowledge of Eisenhower Dollars and doubled dies in particular) should consult with CPG (for example), or the IKE GROUP (regarding peg legs, etc) or IDDD or whatever, provide the diagnostics for a particular die and then designate it as such. I am not really missing the point behind the whole concept of families and book end photographs, etc.... but what will the TPG holder state, Family of FS-101? How do you distinguish between the one that is on the minimum spectrum and the one that is a "wow" coin?

Just my thoughts. Sorry that I am having so much difficulty following along.

Konstantinos
Ever Dance with the Devil by the Pale Moon Light?

User avatar
robEzerman
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by robEzerman » Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:33 pm

Konstantinos, that you are having difficulty "following along" is a tribute to you.

Put it this way: attributing DD Ikes is not that much different than grading Ikes. Both actions require judgements when much is subjective. Both yield "absolutes" when there is no measurable basis for those absolutes in most cases.

A given DD Ike has a 1 to 1 relationship with the die that struck it, but do we really know to what extent minting process variables can subtly alter the pattern of the doubled die? We can all look 20 to 50 raw 72-S SB Ikes and see there a relatively smooth spectrum of "minor" doubling from none to moderate with that doubling looking stronger and to some extent even different when coupled with MDD. So even this 1 to 1 die to coin relationship has the potential to be somewhat influenced by coin press process variables (to say nothing of die state influencing the appearance of the struck coin).

John Wexler and others tried to simplify and stream-line the Ike DD catalog by regressing from individual dies whenever possible to clumping similar-pattern doubling into a "Family" designation. Acting my part of "enfant terrible mud-thrower", I have pointed out that hubbing process variables other than a doubled working hub could account for a family of similarly doubled die Ikes. The point may be moot because we'll probably never know for sure and does it really matter? I think it does matter since assumptions un-tested and un-challenged can lead to compounded unintentional errors down the line.

The role of experts and their catalogs is to give the collector a target to shoot for. HERE are the doubled die Ikes, this is the collection, this is the listing. Black and white.

As you point out, the CPG Ike section, like many catalogs, ran into the problem of multiple dies striking 72-S SB and 73-S Ike "FS-101" candidates. Very confusing, especially since the major TPGs are black-box operations. Ike experts like Brian who have invested in multiple 72-S and 73-S submissions and thereby have perhaps the best handle on the markers being used by PCGS to designate their FS-101 attributions, have a strong financial motivation not to share what they know or at least not in full. So, the CPG will be removing the 72-S and 73-S FS-101's from the catalog pages of their next edition (though retaining these two designations in their cumulative table of down-grades).

My solution, sorry to repeat this so often, is simply to recognize that "Families" of several of the Collectible Ike DD's are a reality, whatever their specific origin, and perhaps the best way to handle this situation is by "Bookend Photos" that illustrate a weakest attributable example along side a strong example, that any candidate Ike that fell between these two photos (or sets of photos) could receive the Family XX attribution.

To answer another of your question, perhaps a simple numeric designation of where the candidate DD Ike fell between the two extremes would help, with .1 being the weakest attributable and .9 being a really strong example?

I don't know if my idea will catch on but I'll present it again and in more detail in Volume 1.

Whether by mine or another approach, a way to provide the Ike DD collector with "investment security" will emerge with time, though it may take a new generation of numismatists as the pros in the field currently seem to have entrenched interests and perhaps seem more interested in doing their own thing individually than working cooperatively to come up with a solution to this problem.
Now is the time to cherry Ikes. Lots of fruit still on the trees but don't wait too long. Rob Ezerman

User avatar
19Lyds
Posts: 1148
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by 19Lyds » Wed Jan 11, 2012 8:12 pm

THUNDRLIPZ wrote: But what I must be continously losing the ability to understand is how can any attributor really identify, for example, a 1972 FS-101 when no one really knows what it is? That is, and just following this logically... we have a picture of a motto... this motto purporting to tell us what a 1972 FS-101 looks like.
This exact reason is why I referred attribution of the 1972-S FS-101 to John Wexler.

He should have detailed photographs of more than just the motto.

The Authoritative Reference on Eisenhower Dollars has 10 Photo's.

Professional attributers due have a full library of photographs at their fingertips. The CPG, on the other hand, only has the single photo.
I cannot and will not be held responsible for my typing errors as it appears that there is a bug in the keyboard!
........I've tried on numberous occasions to fix the problme but it just keeps coming back agin and again! -L. Lydston 2008

THUNDRLIPZ
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:35 am
Contact:

Re: Quick Question concerning FS versus Wexler #'s

Post by THUNDRLIPZ » Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:02 am

Lee, right on point...but, and here is the key part, Wexler can only attribute his equivalent of the FS-101. He cannot, no matter how vast his library is, attribute a coin as an FS-101 when in fact he (in theory) does not have the photographs that the CPG, or the coin for that matter), that the CPG used in determing what constitutes an FS-101 (for any particular year).

I remember the first coin I ever cherried was the 04/21... I saw one pic, compared it. Another pic, compared, etc. Wow, I had it. I felt confident. Now if there was a CPG had an equivalent of the 4/21 (which if ever there was a coin that should be in it, it is this one), based off of one photo, you could not attribute the CPG version of the 4/21 with just that one pic. It is impossible.

Anyway, Rob.... I think the family idea can work if you do the .1, .2, .3 designation which would attribute the individual die. Sort of like the 1972-S double die cent that has I believe 9 different attributed CPG versions. Get into the family, and then, different die by different die attribute each one that falls between the minimum to the maximum. It's either that or attribute specifically. Dies that have great spreads will always be collectible and carry a premium no matter what the designation.

But in the end, as someone pointed out earlier, it's about the money and not the collector or the series. Don't get me wrong, I am not an idealot. I understand how the world turns. It would be nice to meet in the middle if possible.

Great example, remember when the 74-S RPM was delisted.... isn't great how people intimately involved on this site still post them on Ebay as RPM's and seek top dollar? LOLOLOL.... That kind of Ike Investor/Collector does nothing to advance the study of Eisenhower dollars. Some idiot will be that coin not knowing any better and when they find out they essentially got duped, will be down not only on the seller, but on the series as well.

Either way, I think the IKE Group has a great possibility to take the lead in a series and become the lead to follow, for example, when it comes to the peg leg's and fevs. It would be nice to see DIVA FPL-101, DIVA FPL 102 (different variant), DIVA FEV 101, DIVA FEV 102, etc. Can you get John at ANACS to attribute coins based on the DIVA.

I SAY GO FOR IT... this book is more of an authority than CPG's any day of the week.
Ever Dance with the Devil by the Pale Moon Light?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest