They Say That There Is No Known Error Of This Date, Y'all Tell Me

yes there is damage to the coin, but you can see where the damage is. like you said towards the I will try to get better pictures of the coin, if you in large the picture,I am sure that you can see that the p is not damaged. it's clear that it's a p on top of a p.

The P appears to be MD, as John advised.

Like the others have mentioned, a larger clear pic would help, but it does look to me like a piece of the Fred Sanford Collection. I'll write back if I get more information.

May I ask who attributed this as being the real deal? And, if it is the real deal then why try to make a game of this? I am not saying yea or nay, but to everyone's defense your pic is not really clear enough to give you a fair assessment.

I have to disagree with you, Swampboy. I have posted several examples of legitimate doubling, and I have also posted examples of Machine Doubling. When the doubling is legitimate, the people here are more than willing to admit it and congratulate me. I have also posted examples where not everyone agrees on the specific error, or if it is an error at all. Everyone here is taking a best guess based on only a picture. Some of these people have decades of experience and have assessed thousands of coins. Personally, I think their opinion is worth listening to.

I always say there are no no varieties, not errors for the post 1973 listings from Variety Vista. Errors and varieties are two different things. I classify coin into three groups plus two sub groups:

1. Die varieties are created on the dies.
2. Error coins are usually one of a kind examples.
3. Die events produce hundreds of the thousands of examples from a compromised die that was normal when it started out.
4. Striking errors are happenings during the striking process. Some are errors and other are just common happenings, like Machine Doubling. (very common).
5. Then there is also coin events where the coin was altered/damaged during circulation.