What is the correct term?

[vampicker]

You can not actually know the number of coins struck by this die - the best you can do is make a guess based on apparent scarcity. The VAM 23A is legitimately rare, while the various stages of VAM 23B are scarce at best. It is clear they are harder to find than many other 89 varieties. I do not accept your contention this obverse lasted thru the average number of strikes. You don't need to go any farther than the reverse in question. Far more coins were struck with this reverse than this obverse.

You've chosen to gloss over a repeated fact visible in the coins. The marriage in question stayed married throughout the entire VAM 23 progression and clashed multiple (3 by your own count)times with FAR greater impact evident on the obverse than the reverse. The first one imparted the strongest apparent clash in the entire series on one face and barely marked the other. How? Then obverse got polished only to clash again, then again. And again unusually strong clashing was visible on the obverse with still nearly no marks on the reverse. Still not a normal pattern.
Then the obverse gets retired from excessive 'chippiness' or whatever. The still serviceable reverse gets a new obverse mate then clashes again, only this time the normal even impact leaves clashmarks that look pretty typical on both faces. Why the different reaction when the obverse was swapped? The only variable was the obverse die yet the results were radically different.

[PacificWR]

You can not actually know the number of coins struck by this die - the best you can do is make a guess based on apparent scarcity. The VAM 23A is legitimately rare, while the various stages of VAM 23B are scarce at best. It is clear they are harder to find than many other 89 varieties. I do not accept your contention this obverse lasted thru the average number of strikes. You don't need to go any farther than the reverse in question. Far more coins were struck with this reverse than this obverse.

You've chosen to gloss over a repeated fact visible in the coins. The marriage in question stayed married throughout the entire VAM 23 progression and clashed multiple (3 by your own count)times with FAR greater impact evident on the obverse than the reverse. The first one imparted the strongest apparent clash in the entire series on one face and barely marked the other. How? Then obverse got polished only to clash again, then again. And again unusually strong clashing was visible on the obverse with still nearly no marks on the reverse. Still not a normal pattern.
Then the obverse gets retired from excessive 'chippiness' or whatever. The still serviceable reverse gets a new obverse mate then clashes again, only this time the normal even impact leaves clashmarks that look pretty typical on both faces. Why the different reaction when the obverse was swapped? The only variable was the obverse die yet the results were radically different.

You can choose to ignore the facts on the 1889-P VAM-23A/VAM-23B if you want to, but I don't. Since I have an example of all know (and one that is not known) obverse/reverse (in some case many of them) die sequences I have had an excellent opportunity to study them and see what the dies are saying. Once again, the 1889-P VAM-23B die sequence #3 and #4 are not rare. Only die sequence #1 and to a lesser degree die sequence #2 are rare. The count of known specimens bears this out.

Correction, I have not glossed over the die clashing events on the 1889-P VAM-23A/VAM-23B. The correct count is 4 and all of them severe. We are talking the Deepest known clashed IN in the entire Morgan Dollar series. This a contributing factor to the very apparent die stress. Only one reverse die was used for all of the VAM 23 & 7 series (this includes all known die sequences and one undocumented VAM). The VAM numbers are, VAM-23A/VAM-23B, VAM-7, VAM-7A, VAM-7B1, and VAM-7B2 For each of these VAM's each die sequence has been documented on the appropriate VAM page except one. The one exception is the 1889-P VAM-7B1 and it will be documented in the future just like the others have (detailed photos). When one lets the reverse die for the above VAMs talk to them a unique set of facts starts to unfold. two of the known facts (for this reverse die) are: 1. a long die life. 2. At least 9 clashing events. Try letting the reverse die talk to you and see what other facts you can come up with.

[vampicker]

I'll ask again - why did the obverse and reverse react differently? If you can't or won't answer, then this discussion is pointless

[PacificWR]

I'll ask again - why did the obverse and reverse react differently? If you can't or won't answer, then this discussion is pointless

I have said this several times before, so here we go again, part of the answer to your question is letting the 1889-P VAM-23A/23B, VAM-7, VAM-7a, VAM-7B1 and VAM-7B2 reverse die talk to you. I have already listed two facts. Try it and see what other facts you come you with.
Start with the 1889-P VAM-23A and continue through the 1889-P VAM-7B2.

[vampicker]

That is EXACTLY what I did and the 'softer than normal obverse' is what I found as the most likely explanation. You already know I've looked at the various stages in hand at length. I'm hard pressed to see an actual conclusion from you beyond repeatedly saying I'm wrong.
I'll repeat my question since you don't seem to want to offer an answer - why did the obverse and reverse react differently from each other in their multiple clashing episodes?

[PacificWR]

That is EXACTLY what I did and the 'softer than normal obverse' is what I found as the most likely explanation. You already know I've looked at the various stages in hand at length. I'm hard pressed to see an actual conclusion from you beyond repeatedly saying I'm wrong.
I'll repeat my question since you don't seem to want to offer an answer - why did the obverse and reverse react differently from each other in their multiple clashing episodes?

When you did your research, we did not have the 1889-P VAM-7B1 and VAM-7B2. In addition, all of the VAM listings have been revised and new ones created. If you are not willing to do due diligence and let the reverse die talk to you then you will never find out what you missed. The facts are there...you just need to find them. It's up to you not me.

[vampicker]

When you did your research, we did not have the 1889-P VAM-7B1 and VAM-7B2. In addition, all of the VAM listings have been revised and new ones created. If you are not willing to do due diligence and let the reverse die talk to you then you will never find out what you missed. The facts are there...you just need to find them. It's up to you not me.
[/quote]

I did the revision on VAM 7B personally in the same batch that I sent the several stages of 23B and the images of 23A to Leroy in 2020. It's in the letter you posted in this very thread. I'm the one that found conclusive evidence that VAM 7B was the same reverse used earlier with VAMs 23A and 23B. That is a relevant fact. The later split of 7B to 7B1 and 7B2 didn't really change anything, but does add to the evidence that the reverse had a much longer life than the obverse. My question to you remains. You've had a couple of years to mull it over and still have no solid answer.

[PacificWR]

Oh yes it does. It has everything to do with letting the reverse die talk to you. It shows more of the facts and additional ones that I have been talking about. When you did your submittal to LVA you knew very little about the facts behind the reverse die. All you proved was the reverse die for the 1889-P VAM-23A/VAM-23B was used on another obverse die. Everything else was just an unproven theory. How do I know this? Because I am the one that created the LVA verified die sequencing (with detailed photos) for the 1889-P VAM-23A/VAM-23B, VAM-7, VAM-7A, VAM-7B1 and VAM-7B2. This was done after your September 2020 submittal. Why did I take this time-consuming route? Because I let the die talk to me and tell me the facts. They are there, you just need to find them. If you want to live in past history, that’s your choice.

[vampicker]

The progression I laid out in September 2020 is virtually identical. This is a fact borne out by my letter to Van Allen - see the other thread on this subject. You do deserve credit for finding a couple of stages I predicted but didn't have in hand. The added stages do not change the story, they actually reinforce it. You also deserve credit for finding the later stage of VAM 7B2 that was the former VAM 60. With the additional stages in hand it should have been even more clear that the reaction of the reverse to clashing changed when the VAM 23 obverse was no longer paired with it. Additionally, there's very little die wear evident on that specific reverse die during the time it was used in the VAM 23 progression. This clearly indicates a relatively short run, particularly when compared to the 7A/7B group. Normal die wear indicative of a bunch of coins struck is clearly evident on those former VAM 60 examples. The dies do tell a story and it looks like my theory. I will stand by it unless I have evidence to the contrary. Despite you repeated claims, you haven't come up with anything I'd consider relevant. You may not believe this, but I'd chuck my theory and say why if I thought there was clearly contradictory evidence. I've done so with other theories in the past. I will crush my own dreams every bit as fast as someone else's. It's a shame VAM World 1.0 is no longer accessible or I'd refer you to 'A Blow To My Beautiful Theory".
Again I ask you the question you will not or can not answer - why did the obverse and reverse in this progression react differently? No other point is actually relevant to this discussion no matter how hard you try to say otherwise.

[PacificWR]

Not even close. How many coins did you submit to LVA? Four is that correct? This is one of the things you keep missing, in order to let the dies, do the talking and see all the facts they present, you need a total of 19 coins. Your submittal was not even close to that. So how could you have even half of the information needed to make a decision? Each one of the 19 coins provide information. Some more than others. You did the best you could with what you had, but you just did not have all the coins. To be fair about this, there is no way you could have because I had not finished my work and created the die sequences for the 1889-P VAM-23A/VAM23B, VAM-7, VAM-7A, VAM-7B1 and VAM-7B2. There is still more work to be done, but not about this topic. As far as the 1889-P VAM-23A/VAM-23B die life goes it did produce an average number of coins. The facts bear this out. No mention in the mint records of a soft die, die sequence #3 and #4 are easy to obtain. In my own collection I have 15 specimens’, 40 are registered with SSDC and they can be found on eBay (there was one out there last week) plus I have seen dozens on eBay and at the action houses. In addition, one other person on this post said they were easy to obtain. When you let the obverse/reverse dies talk to you, it will show you additional facts.

[vampicker]

Congratulations on all the collecting. So what does it mean since you have all this information in hand? Why does the the VAM 23 obverse behave so differently than the VAM 7 pieces in the sequence?

[PacificWR]

It’s not all about the 1889-P VAM-23A/VAM-23B obverse die. Part of it is, but part of it has to do with the reverse die. There is no doubt that the deepest clashed IN known in the Morgan Dollar series created a lot of die stress on the obverse die. Add two more hard clashing events (1 on die sequence #3 and 1 on die sequence #4) and you have additional die stress being added. Note, the terminal die state is die sequence #4 LDS). I should point out here that for the 1889-P VAM-23B, die sequence #3 and #4, each have several die stages and in these die stages, sometimes the die roughness clears up to a certain degree and sometimes it gets worse. So, when do you have the first sign of die fatigue appear? On the 1889-P VAM-23B Die sequence #4 LDS in the form of a die chip. Not a die crack or a die break. The first sign of die fatigue happened at the end of the normal obverse die run. How do we know this. Several facts point this out, 1. Availability of die sequence #3 and 4 (this includes all the die stages). 2. No mention in the mint records of a soft die. 3. No die cracks/breaks. 4. Reverse die.

Moving on to the reverse die, note how little has changed. Starting with the VAM-7 series, that’s about to change, the reverse die is really going to start talking and laying out the facts. Sure, we have new obverse die, but that is going to help make a very important statement about the reverse die. When you start to let the reverse die really talk to you, start with VAM-7A, and note how early the first sign of die fatigue (die cracks) appears. This helps to reinforce the normal mintage totals of the 1889-P VAM-23B and it also is making a very important statement about the reverse die. The 1889-P VAM-7A is a very important VAM, this is where the facts start rolling out. Next, continue with VAM-7B1 and then VAM-7B2 and see what facts keep repeating time and time again (for all three VAMs).

The roadmap has been laid out (short version), now just let the die talk to you.

[vamsterdam]

on other series, we refer to die chips as die breaks. small, or large depending on the size. or are we referring to radial, or curving ones? are not chips where a piece of the die has broken away?

[vampicker]

The utter absurdity of all this meandering argument with no conclusion from you is that I did 'read' the dies and it was studying the VAM 7B that cemented the 'softer than normal' die theory.

Massive clash after massive clash -and yes- note how little has changed on the reverse. That's the point. That's always been the point. Obverse and reverse in the VAM 23 marriage behaved differently.

Unless you're still trying to push the phantom remarriages from the previous thread on this subject.

[PacificWR]

Now that’s interesting [“The utter absurdity of all this meandering argument with no conclusion”]. You still don’t get that you missed a lot of facts. Even when someone lays at a road map for you to follow. You refuse to do it. For starters you ignore fact that the 1889-P VAM-23B Die sequence #3 & #4 are not rare. There are plenty of them out there. This fact alone blows your unproven theory out of the water. This is reinforced in VAM-7A when you missed the first sign of die fatigue on the reverse die. This is a big statement (fact) about the reverse die. VAM-7B1 and VAM-7B2 reinforce this. The facts are repeated time and time again in these two VAMs. I did the work; all you need to do is let the dies to talk to you and present the facts. Until you do that, you will not find out all the facts.

[LateDateMorganGuy]

Interesting back & forth. I am not educated on the subject series so I am not in a position to comment on that. I have no dog in this discussion. But I will say I have challenged JR in the past in my lengthy VAM education and always came out of learning something from him. When he was wrong, he readily admitted it and ate crow (nicely of course). But he was never wrong with me. I just learned to sit back, listen to what he said, and came to understand his knowledge and point of view. Besides, I didn't want to piss off the guy that would eventually see my coins and attribute/grade them.

Besides, as JR suggests, what's the point anyway?

[vampicker]

I've made my arguments and Wayne has misrepresented or ignored them repeatedly. I've repeatedly asked him for his explanation since he's never accepted mine even when the evidence presented supports it.
I stand by my theory but would welcome further discussion from anyone else. It's clear you will never agree with me , or do the rest of the VAM World community the courtesy of an actual conclusion from your research since you seem to think you've arrived at one.
I'll even do you the courtesy of staying out of it unless I'm specifically asked to comment.

[PacificWR]

Boy, this just keeps getting better. I have given you every opportunity to list your facts for your unproven theory, but you can’t, because you have none. In addition, I have even provided a roadmap for you to use so you can see all the facts that you missed, but you ignore it. So, the question is why? Here is just a little bit more of interesting information, a VAMWorld member contacted me and wanted some information on the 1889-P VAM-23B. So, I pulled my 1889-P VAM-23B collection and did a recount. Looks like I have 15 die sequence #3 & #4 specimens and 3 die sequence #1 & #2 specimens for a total of 18 specimens. I have said this before in this post, the fact that the 1889-P VAM-23B die sequence #3 & #4 are not rare and are easily obtainable blows the soft die theory out of the water. There are other facts on the obverse die that supports this to. I could let this go and be satisfied, but that would leave so many other facts uncovered. Moving on from the obverse die, let’s talk about what you missed on the reverse die. Once again, I have given you every opportunity to let the reverse die talk to you and see what facts you missed, but you just ignore it. Fist we have a VAM-7B1 and VAM-7B2 not a VAM-7B. There are very good reasons why VAM-7B was split. If you want to live in past history that’s your choice. Moving on to the reverse die, the first place to start is with VAM-7. Looking at the obverse what has changed? Answer: we now have a new die that is not under any die stress. Turn the coin over and look at the reverse. Nothing much has changed here. Looks pretty much like it did when it was used on the 1889-P VAM-23A/VAM-23B. Next, move on to the revised VAM-7A listing and go down to die sequence #1. I have said this before in this post and I’ll say it again, this is where the reverse die really starts talking and laying out some of the facts. Moving on, in Die sequence #1 look at the obverse and see if anything has changed. Answer: yes. We now have a double clash at the neck/jaw junction. Note: this is the sixth clashing event for the reverse die. Until now, noting has ever showed up on the reverse die. Turn the coin over and look at the reverse die. We now have a weak double clash going up towards the N & G. The reverse die is making a statement here, but what is it? Don’t go on to die sequence #2 yet, we are not done here yet. Look at the left and right leaf clusters. No sign of clashing here. This is important. Next, move on to die sequence #2 and let’s look at the obverse for any changes. Do we have any? Answer: Yes. We have another new double clashing event. At the same location, but this time, we have clashing around the lips and just a little bit at the back of the cap. Turn the coin over and look at the reverse. We now have a much bolder and defined clashing going up between the N & G. Now let’s check the left & right leaf clusters. We now have very weak clashing visible. Now stop and think how many clashing events we have had with the new obverse die. The answer is 4. Same total as with the VAM-23A/VAM23B. One might wonder why is the clashing {still weak) on the reverse die now visible? Clearly something has changed. The reverse die is making a big statement here. Move on to die sequence #3 to find out. Looking at the obverse die it sure looks like nothing much has changed here. Turn the coin over and now look at the reverse. We still have the double clashing going up between the N & G and the weak clashing on the left and right leaf cluster, so what has changed. Answer: we now have the very first signs of reverse die fatigue with the die cracks in MERI. Now stop here and thing about that. The reverse die is making a very big statement here. Well, what are the facts telling us: 1. We now have the very first signs of die fatigue and this is after 8 clashing events (4 on VAM-23A/VAN-23B and 4 on VAM-7A). 2. Even after 8 clashing events (two which resulted in the deepest clash IN in the Morgan Dollars series), a brand-new obverse die, the first signs of die fatigue, we only have weak clashing on the reverse die. This speaks volumes about the superb quality of the reverse die. 3. Die cracks in MERI. What do they mean. A. Fist sign of die fatigue on reverse die. B. The reverse die has had a lengthy die run (note this occurs early in the VAM-7 series) and adds supporting facts to the known availability of the 1889-P VAM-23B die sequence #3 and #4 (your theory is just blown out of the water again)

Ok, I am going to stop here. I refuse to write a book. I have done it once and that’s enough. If you choose not to follow the roadmap through VAM-7B2 that’s your choice. You will just miss a lot of additional facts.

[vampicker]

What the hell - you keep droning on about me calling 23B rare. I did not say that ever. "Scarce at best' is not rare. I did say the 23B is harder to find than the later stages of 7B. I'm sure some of your pieces in the more greatly detailed micro progression are harder to find than other but so what? That's a natural occurrence. To the best of my knowledge only the 23A is actually rare, which is exactly what I did say.
You keep going on and on about me not following the story of the dies. This is bizarre frankly, much of this happened in public at shows with other members of this community sitting down with me pouring over multiple examples at length.
You've repeatedly claimed an improperly hardened die can't strike a bunch of coins and you've got a bunch of 23B examples. You are making a supposition on the durability of a improperly hardened die. The first die Barber notes in his letter that you posted in the other thread was returned after coining ONLY 75,000 or so pieces. A variety that involves what is clearly a failing die is the 83-O VAM 1C group. Between the three noted stages there are 65 examples in the SSDC registry.
I'm glad you are so impressed with the clashing that occurs during the 7B portion of the progression. It is fairly typical as far as clashes go and is evidence in favor of the theory I presented. When the 'normal' 7 obverse is placed into service typical stuff follows.
I don't expect you to agree with me. I don't agree with you. And you still haven't answered that question I've asked over and over. And you won't. I don't care about your ax that you want to grind with me. I've tried to stick to the coins themselves. I daresay I have not been afforded the same courtesy.

[PacificWR]

Oh my! Close the front door. I think you need to go back and reread Charles Barber’s letter. Start with page 2, right at the top. Charles Barber did not say the dies were soft. It was the branch Mints that said they were soft and what did Charles Barber do? He put one of the dies in question (1876 half dollar from San Francisco) in one of their own coin presses and guess what happen? It struck 264,000 pieces. Fast forward to 1888, The New Orleans mint was complaining about the Morgan Dollars dies and returned a pair. The complaint was the dies were cracking (die fatigue) at 75,000 pieces. Hum, think this is another example of what I have been talking about with the 1889-P VAM-23B mintage and die sequence #3 and #4 availability (easy to obtain). Moving on, what was the next thing Charles Barber did? Answer: He placed die pair #86 in one of their own coining presses and it struck 450,000 pieces and was still in good shape. There is not one word mentioned about hardening.

I can tell you what happens next when the man returns from his trip. I have all the mint records to prove it. I can add them to this post if you want.

Keep on ignoring the facts. The facts come out when you let the dies talk. It needs to start at the beginning and runs to the end of the die life.