1949threepence

Me too, Pete. Should hopefully be some high end rarities in there.

Looks as though dnw are doing this. Part 1 (which admittedly doesn't contain a massive amount) is on their catalogue for 13th/14th June 2018 auction. Whether succeeding parts will be added to this or subsequent auctions - well who knows at this stage? link

Don't know either way Pete.

Some of these differences are very subtle.

Not any more. We're onto these Russians and their cyber shenanigans, now.

Incidentally, with regard to the Gouby ja, Goubt describes the j as "Underneath of Brit's helmet as concave" and ja as "Underneath of Brit's helmet upright".

Freeman 72, Paddy - 7 + H. The neck can be deceptive on worn coins.

Well done Jerrry - especially the F98, which seem to be incredibly difficult to get in high grade. Sone really nice buys there.

It is indeed. Thanks Bernie.

Yes, yours shows the same pattern as mine. With that level of wear on Britannia, you'd reasonably expect commensurate wear of and quite possibly rubbing of the lettering. But that's not the case.

Something I've noticed as a feature exclusively common to reverse F, is that on otherwise fine or even good fine specimens, Britannia seems to have worn away far more than other areas of the coin, which leads to that characteristic flat look, extending downward into the centre of the shield, rather than the shield being individually affected. My own F32, which I'd otherwise describe as GF, is a prime example. Just wondered if anybody had any thoughts as to why. It does seem to be a pattern of wear unique to reverse F.

Hope he recovers soon and his sight is not permanently affected.

Certainly seems that way, Jerry. The question is, how many are out there? If it's anything like the N over sideways N (Z), then it could easily become a variety in its own right. Nice purchase and neat variety spot by Larry Gurney. Just a suggestion and feel free to poo poo it, but might it be worth e mailing Michael Gouby to see if he knows of it, or may like to look?

Well I suppose the AA01 might have some cache, but there's nothing that distinctive about the rest - if it had been 690096, then at least you'd have had a palindrome.

I see Cureton was a buyer in 1832, and still very active in the 1854 Cuff sale. I assume the buyer's name and hammer price was written in manuscript by the auctioneer or his assistant immediately after the coin sold.

Couldn't agree more, although if you're anything like me, you learn as you go along. As I started collecting, I also started to buy books and learn. One thing of considerable note IMO - that once you are deep into collecting your chosen speciality, the increasig breadth of technical and other knowledge you hold about that speciality, will stand you in very good stead both for avoiding being ripped off, and possibly even more importantly, recognising a bargain and/or a prized acquisition. Keep at it Jamie and good luck

That's asparagus for you !

Agreed. With the wear on that coin I'd say it's far more probable than not, that there was an H there. But let's not forget. as Jerry alluded to, the no H 1882's have obverse 11, and the coin above is obverse 12.

Went for £1700 at dnw, then for nearly $6k (£4255) at Atlas, according to @oldcopper above. I bet it looks nearer to the original pic, in hand, though.

Thanks for the heads up.

Crikey. Talk about a transformation. Is it trick photography or has the coin been treated?

Neat capture - love that phrase "brutally honest state"

Could be an H. It's in about the right spot. Here's one for comparison:- http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/img.php?a=160&l=2446&f=r&s=m

Absolutely fantastic find, Richard. Very, very well done. Probably just about the best F28 out there.

No worries. Very nice coin. No worries. Very nice coin.