? Has anyone ever seen a

[fogie]

? Has anyone ever seen a 1902-S that did not have the 2 berry reverse (C4/C3)? The VAMs 1, 2 & 4 are listed as having C4 reverses. My VAM-4 was attributed by LVA but it clearly has the C4/C3 reverse (as well as a near date).

[alefzero]

1 & 4 (missed the slight left tilt on 1) and 2 & 5 are likely early duplicate listings. Will look for a C4 reverse of the date nonetheless.

[fogie]

sounds like a resounding - NO.

[alefzero]

I looked at a LOT of Morgans of that date. There are occasional ones with a ghost olive that could easily be mistaken for a C4 reverse. But every one of them was corroborated as the same dies as a higher grade C4/C3. Note also what VAMs for the date are not imaged in the VAM book. I suspect they were either lower grade than to be photogenic or AGM and LVA did not see the coins but were reported by a reliable party. Nonetheless, with such a worn specimen, not making the dual-hub call is plausible. These are low numbers and thus very early listings. I stand by the guess of the duplications I cited. Not sure of the current listing mechanics, but maybe they should be delisted until a convincing one can be presented and exhibited properly.

[messydesk]

I'll take a look at Alan's 02-S die study (pretty sure he did one) when I get home and try to figure out what to do.