Leaderboard

Thank you, one and all for your birthday wishes. . I actually retired 15 years ago but now there's the added bonus of that huuuuuge State Pension to look forward to.

Yes, certainly not a mule, more of an ass! How can the vendor, being aware of the variety, get it so wrong? I suppose on the positive side, anyone looking to spend £200 in this series would not be caught out...........? I did note the coin you posted, Prax, but at least yours was in good condition and therefore worthy of collecting as an example of impaired striking at the mint. I must admit that I take Freeman's comment re the weak striking at the teeth (and sometimes the L.C.Wyon below the bust) and the resulting occasional appearance of a section of 'beads' as a warning against the confusion demonstrated by the vendor, rather than a suggestion of varietal merits. Jerry

Hi Mathew Great to see you posting again. I also like the latest obverse. It is life like for a lady in her 80's she is still regal and a credit to the Commonwealth.

I actually quite like the new one, so I voted for that. The Gillick, I have fond memories of, but the relief - or rather definition - was always quite poor and so I just couldn't vote for it. The Machin, I do like, simply because it shows more than just the head, but was it much of a likeness of the Queen back in 1965 when it was first used? The Maklouf, my least favourite, it looked younger than the Queen did back in 1985. Fairly utilitarian and bland portrait. The Rank Broadley was a vast improvement as it actually looked like the Queen and up until this new one was probably the most lifelike of any of the Queen's previous portraits.