1964 Kennedy DDO possible new variety

[Coindog]

I've been going through some of my rolls of AU/BU Kennedy Halves, and I came across what I believe might be a
new DDO variety. It seems to have the attributes of a couple different die varieties, encompassed into it. I'm listing
two of maybe four Variety Vista die varieties I find most in common. 1964 Kennedy DDO-015 and DDO-031. There's
one letter on mine that I didn't see in any of the varieties in Vista. The "T".
Am I accurate with what I'm seeing, or is my mind playing tricks on me.
As always, your opinions are appreciated. Thank you.
P.S. I took the whole series like in Vista but I'm only posting the most relevant.

[mustbebob]

The notching does indeed indicate that this is a doubled die. I agree that the DDO's you mention are similar, but I just can't tell. This is where markers come in. Are there any markers you can find that might help us identify this one? It is also very possible that this is a new variety for the series.

[Coindog]

I was looking for markers while I was looking for a similar liberty T as on mine, but no luck with either. I'll go through the markers again and get back to you. Because the Liberty "T" is unique to my specimen, I'm leaning towards a new die variety.
I'll check the clouds again too. The Obv. field is pretty pure.

[Coindog]

Mustbebob,
What would you say if I told you that this is the same Kennedy Half with the die scrape in the reverse field?
One of the markers on mine is the upper hair of DDO-031. But there's so much else different relative to that variety.

[Coindog]

Mustbebob, I think I may have found the variety, but then again, maybe not. I believe it may be 1964 DDO-011, except that it isn't stage B but rather could be stage C, obv. and rev. LDS.
Maybe you can confirm. The only thing that puts a wrench in this is that Liberty "T". I checked everything and this is the only answer I got to, other than not matching it up at all. LOL

[Coindog]

Mustbebob, I just did a seriously long comparison of this coin to the DDO-011, and I'm convinced it's the same die variety but in stage C. I think when you compare the two, you'll agree.
If confirmed as stage C, being there is none known, would I have to submit it as a stage C new variety for attribution?

[atrox001]

Coindog…I don’t think any of the half dollars you are comparing to yours in this post, the 64 DDO-015, DDO-031 or the DDO-011 match, note they are all Proofs and yours looks like a Business Strike.
There are only four 64 BS DDO’s in the listings, DDO-007, -016, -017 and -018, and I don’t think your photos match any of these. Check them out on Variety Vista. Also note the description of the 64 Master Die (64 MDO-002), Light spread on we trust, 64 of date, TY of LIBERTY, and hair under the R of LIBERTY, might match yours.
I think most of the doubling I see on your half dollar is minor, and it would be too minor to list.

[Coindog]

Atrox001,
Thank you for your input. I knew that that the DDO'S were proof dies. I was thinking the Philly mint screwed up as usual and used an obverse proof die on BS coins. LOL!
Looks like a new variety. As for my DDO being minor, if that's the case, then more than half the varieties should be delisted. The doubling of my Y,T, and R, are stronger than the majority of the listings. I actually spotted the doubling in my 10X loop, and according to the standard, if you can see it in a loop, it's valid. So I respectfully disagree on that point.
Thanks again.

[atrox001]

I think what is showing in your photo of the R, T, and Y would be MDD (Machine Damage Doubling), note the inside of the right arm of the Y, or the inside of the R, in LIBERTY.

[mustbebob]

Coindog...there are a couple of things you mentioned that I believe warrant some replies.

I was thinking the Philly mint screwed up as usual and used an obverse proof die on BS coins

There is no indication at all that the mint used a Proof die for business strike coins...especially on your coin. Your statement implies that it happens all the time and that is just not true. It did happen a few times for reverse dies such as type B on quarters, but again, it is not common, nor is there any indication that is what happened here.

As for my DDO being minor, if that's the case, then more than half the varieties should be delisted.

This is not your call. The attributer and club makes those rules, and lists what they think is appropriate enough at the time. There are many case where dies have been delisted, but seldom (if ever) for being too minor. Usually a delisted variety is a result of duplication or something else debunks the listing.

When you submit a coin, the attributer makes a decision on whether or not to list it. You always hope it gets listed, but you must abide by that attributers call. That is a reason why some clubs list more or less than others.

[Coindog]

Mustbebob, Sorry about the Philly mint comment. I should have followed it with an LOL. I know it's a rare occurrence. I concur it's up to the attributer and will always respect their decision. My point to atrox001 was to merely state the 10x loop standard, which is my yardstick on whether to send it or not.

[Coindog]

atrox001, The arrows aren't pointing out MDD's on the R,T, or Y. Actually the R has no arrows but the top of R is doubled. I know the difference, I read Wexler's book. The arrows are at the serif notches.

[jcuve]

I am with everyone else. Some places look like a minor class 2, others I am wondering if it is MD or LED lighting feedback?

[Coindog]

Jason, over the past few days I've come to basically the same conclusion as you and not worth the effort. Being a 64, it's worth more in silver. Right?

[jcuve]

It's probably not worth pursuing. But, I still would play with the lighting. Try diffusing with some tracing paper or something translucent. I see the bright LEDs used on the larger silver coins as a significant problem...