Spain: 100 pesetas 1986 small versus large head versus 1988! [solved]

N#1258

There's no documentation of the 1988 with small and large bust, whereas the 1986 has documentation and a year line for each AND a year line for non-deciders.  I have just set up the documentation of the 1986 variants, the 1988 I made some time ago.

So, a decision has to be made about the amount of year lines for the 1986 and 1988 coins: Two for each or only one for each, but do we keep the one with no distinction (for type collectors) or not?

My suggestion is 1986/88 with 2 lines: one for the small head and one for the large head. Maybe it's easier to keep the 1986 as is, at least for the referee, and then let him decide about the 1988 and create early grey hair for him (how to divide the 1988 line into two) or just create the new, two line for the head sizes, then no need to split the existing 1988 line….

See also this link, second mail, https://en.numista.com/forum/topic127386.html

Sorry, I just saw that it's worse, than I thought. The 1986 and 1988 have been mixed up, neither has the two existing variants, so the year lines are more messy, than I thought.

I saw it, because I now have both variants for 1986 and 1988, and they don't fit into to the matrix…..

There are 2 year lines for 1986 - Small Head variant and Cal#44.

There are 2 year lines for 1988 - Big Head variant and Cal#45.

I would assume that Cal#44 is also the Big Head variant for 1986 and Cal#45 is also the Small head variant for 1988. Otherwise there would have to be a third variant for each year (neither Big or Small) which I don't believe there is.  I think just adding the two year line comments fix the problem.

Your 1986 graphic has 1988 in the title.

rsirian1

There are 2 year lines for 1986 - Small Head variant and Cal#44.

There are 2 year lines for 1988 - Big Head variant and Cal#45.

 

I would assume that Cal#44 is also the Big Head variant for 1986 and Cal#45 is also the Small head variant for 1988. Otherwise there would have to be a third variant for each year (neither Big or Small) which I don't believe there is.  I think just adding the two year line comments fix the problem.

 

Your 1986 graphic has 1988 in the title.

 

I believe you're are wrong, you cannot reason like that.  Whatever is entered in any of the two Cal# lines can have any of the two varieties and the referee can not know, how to split that number into the large and small head varieties. The lines without Cal# may have been used correctly, but I have my doubts.

I have updated the comments in the four year lines of 1986 and 1988. I hope now it's clearer.

Sjoelund

 

 

Whatever is entered in any of the two Cal# lines can have any of the two varieties and the referee can not know, how to split that number into the large and small head varieties. The lines without Cal# may have been used correctly, but I have my doubts.

 

You are absolutely correct but that is the exact same problem anytime a variant year line is added.  You cannot know which members have already entered their possibly variant coin before the new year line variant was added.  You can only fix it going forward, you can never correct coins already entered.  That has to be up to the individual members to move their own coin.  I suggest that when the two big/little head variant year lines were added the exact same problem occurred.  The only alternative is to never add a variant year line to an existing coin page.

zegeri

I have updated the comments in the four year lines of 1986 and 1988. I hope now it's clearer.

Of course, it's more clear, specially, if you would use “heads” instead of “portraits”?

Certainly the numbers and large and small heads in the four lines are not correct, but ni modo!

Sjoelund

 

Of course, it's more clear, specially, if you would use “heads” instead of “portraits”?

Changed portrait by head in English, et tête en français.

zegeri

Sjoelund

 

Of course, it's more clear, specially, if you would use “heads” instead of “portraits”?

Changed portrait by head in English, et tête en français.

Thanks a lot, well done.