5 Pence - Elizabeth II 3rd portrait; small type

Cita: "peterjhalford"​You guys have wayyyyyy too much time on your hands to count beads! I'm surprised your eyes dont hurt. I fear this is a rabbit hole...

Cita: "Sjoelund"​Please show how you come to your conclusions next time! You just have a common 5P 1997 in a rather bad grade. Here is the proof.
​
​
​
​Edit: Of course it might be, that my control coin is also a variant, but then please show me your control coin counted in the same way.

Cita: "Sjoelund"​

Cita: "peterjhalford"​You guys have wayyyyyy too much time on your hands to count beads! I'm surprised your eyes dont hurt. I fear this is a rabbit hole...

​​It's one of those binary things, either you do it or you let somebody else do it. When you have set it up for the first coin, you just have to adjust the size of the following ones to the exact size of the first one (and be sure of a 100% similiar rotation) and then it's fast to check the amount of beads. The idea if the second I of II points towards a bead or in between, is to be able to avoid to count, is that clear?

Cita: "Sjoelund"​You count the beads, you find an amount. To make sure the count is not normal or normal, you check it against a 3rd coin (control coin) to see which count you get.
​
​

Cita: "Ronmoneda"​

Cita: "Sjoelund"​You count the beads, you find an amount. To make sure the count is not normal or normal, you check it against a 3rd coin (control coin) to see which count you get.
​​
​​

​​How can I be sure that the control coin is normal?

Cita: "rsirian1"​

Cita: "Ronmoneda"​
​

Cita: "Sjoelund"​You count the beads, you find an amount. To make sure the count is not normal or normal, you check it against a 3rd coin (control coin) to see which count you get.
​​​
​​​

​​​How can I be sure that the control coin is normal?

​​In this case they're both "normal" just different from each other, hence 2 variants. What Sjoelund was saying was that since he was comparing 2 coins with the same amount of beads he couldn't be sure a variant existed until he found a third coin with a different amount of beads. If you looked at 100 coins and 90 had 92 beads and 10 had 91 beads then you'd say that 92 was "normal" even though both are still variants.

Cita: "Ronmoneda"​

Cita: "rsirian1"​
​

Cita: "Ronmoneda"​
​​
​

Cita: "Sjoelund"​You count the beads, you find an amount. To make sure the count is not normal or normal, you check it against a 3rd coin (control coin) to see which count you get.
​​​​
​​​​

​​​​How can I be sure that the control coin is normal?

​​​In this case they're both "normal" just different from each other, hence 2 variants. What Sjoelund was saying was that since he was comparing 2 coins with the same amount of beads he couldn't be sure a variant existed until he found a third coin with a different amount of beads. If you looked at 100 coins and 90 had 92 beads and 10 had 91 beads then you'd say that 92 was "normal" even though both are still variants.

​​I think I get it. So the variants are not discrepancies, but rather different normalities.

Cita: "rsirian1"​I hate to use your own work against you but...
​
​

Here is the modified graphic, which now will be used in a new CR.

Cita: "rsirian1"​There is a picture of a 1997 on the NGC site. It has 92 beads like the graphic on the coin page says.

Cita: "Sjoelund"​​​But that's fine, since I made an copy/paste error as well, when I used the documentation from Cobra below:
​
​Here is the modified graphic, which now will be used in a new CR.
​
​Thanks for your surveillance

Cita: "rsirian1"​Good. I'll have to take your word that the 91 pearl 1997 is more common.

Cita: "Sjoelund"​

Cita: "rsirian1"​Good. I'll have to take your word that the 91 pearl 1997 is more common.
​
​

​​If somebody proves the opposite it's not a big problem for me to change that, I just said it because I looked at 10 coins from 1997 all with 91 and could not find any with 92 until you found one....