VAMWorld 2.0

I've been on the receiving end of 'stink eye' a few times....

The mintmark on this piece is strike doubled, and not an RPM. Your reverse does match the markers for the VAM 7 reverse die. The obverse looks like a good match for VAM 7 as well based on the marker in the R you pictured. I'd call this a VAM 7 if it crossed my desk, even though the 'doubled date' do...

It would not be noted. Not a thing I'd encourage anyone to chase.

The partial E clash is clearly visible in my image. It's split by the ray and is about halfway between the R and the eagle's back. No E clash and it's not VAM 1BB

It's in the planchet, just like JB already said

Still say that should have been named 'stink eye'

Yup, probably an UNC or AU when the carver got it

Auction ran late and I was the high bidder by several increments when I went to bed. C'est la vie....

https://coins.ha.com/itm/love-tokens/mo ... ids-101116

and it pales in comparison to what the site's founder could have (still) done had he chose to.

The key word here is 'part' of his collection. Pure blind envy at the stuff you elected to keep.

He calls me every now and then just to say hello. Last time I spoke with him he said he was doing well. It's been a few months.

Pretty certain that's a die scratch rather than a clash. If you have examples with and without this scratch (the former 1H) it's probably worth reaching out to @davidkclose to see if he feels the VAM 1B progression should be revised. The current listing makes no mention of an EDS without the scratch.

Maybe it's the camera angle, but that looks EDS

There's an interview with Leroy as Episode 37

Jeff Starck and Larry Jewett host a weekly podcast for Coin World. I was their guest for episode 192. My interview comes up about 20 minutes in. https://www.buzzsprout.com/273189?artist=Coin+World&client_source=large_player&iframe=true&referrer=https://www.buzzsprout.com/273189.js?artist=Coin+World&...

Thanks John

It's not what the VAM-e actually says anyway.

ISDER is independent of the SSDC, I assume you're referring to last night's VAM-e newsletter.

Unless someone does a die study of this date, it's really just like kicking mud in the water. The variety is defined as a near date with weak doubling on top of the 6. The reverse was not noted as being remarkable. Until there is a detailed die study we don't actually know if there's only one obvers...

If it crossed my desk I'd call it 17 and be done with it