VAMWorld 2.0

Looks like there's a die gouge in the first left cluster above the NE of ONE. Didn't find a match in the first pass thru the listings

Last call for this year's edition. Judging starts tomorrow

It reinforces my repetitive point about not liking the near vs normal description. The original listing makes no mention of date position. But I'll go ahead and put a DPIS notation on the page

Near vs normal will cook your brain if you let it. It's irrelevant here because the VAM 28 date is plated in the VAM book. Enough is captured in the image to positively determine it's a match.

BTW, that 80 VAM 1A2 is probably worth sending back in for grade review with your next order.

Here's the mug shot I had in mind

Doug's reholder due to Rottweiler damage may end up on the NSDR website sometime soon. I'm planning on doing a series of brief articles for the organization. I'll post notice when it actually happens. It will take something resembling free time so it might be a while

Bump. Because December 1st is almost here

Clay, you suck.... feel the envy

If those Micro O's are wrong, we'll fix them.

Might need to mark it to my attention,

...and yet, you'll still try.

'Dubious' is unofficial. This has come up multiple times for a variety of pieces. Please take VAM World with a grain of salt.

I'm not happy that I know this, but, the (mintmark) labels are the result of being able to distinguish mint of origin by the green monster banding and serial numbers. Once out of the box, that information is lost. If you find yourself not caring, you're probably right.

Another year has passed and Dec 1 is rapidly approaching again. Brush up those sets before the deadline.....

Try putting a little acetone on a Q-tip and putting it on one of those lumps.

I'd definitely note it if requested. Usually, I'd do something this size anyway. But there's no guarantee this would cross my desk unless it was part of a variety order. It's a judgement call on the part of the grader when there's no request from the submitter.

One thing I didn't say is that I'd be pretty stoked if any of us (I'd prefer me) ran across a VAM 6 with the clashing and no polish job. But it's most like like JB noted - the thing that caused the reverse die swap.

OK, I've had a chance to look at a few coins in hand from my set. A pair of VAM 18 - 61 PL and 53, a pair of VAM 6 - 62PL and 58, a pair of VAM 4 - 64+PL and 63 and one VAM 2B. I made a few observations with coins in hand that confirm the conclusions I reached when I wrote the 78-CC guide. VAM 6 is ...

Late to the party, but it's well known that excessive use of the Force will cause a break

Can't rule out VAM 18 clashing later, but that obverse clash is always present. I'll have to dig a few CC's out this weekend or Monday and look again

And yeah, what JB said about likely being the thing that caused the 6/18 reverse swap