Unique US 220B (With PF Cert) Ebay Auction - Thoughts?

The cert was submitted "believed to be 220b" but was returned ID'd as a 220. From another perspective, the PF would have returned the cert stating: SUBMITTED AS 220B "CAP ON RIGHT "2", AND WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS A SCOTT 220, BUT THE RIGHT "2" DOES NOT EXHIBIT A "CAP" VARIETY, RATHER ITS APPEARANCE IS DUE TO AN INKING ABNORMALITY. * * * * * *

As I pointed out 2 years ago on this forum, Scott 220B does not exist. See my Research Report #22 of the USSS. This stamp is like a very early-identified (1935ish) Relief Break G. No two "G" are alike, needed for to prove a true relief break. Break "G' was described for history as missing ink at the far right side of the top of the right two. Uncommon, but hardly rare. I have numerous copies of similar inking problems. Notice the lack of ink at the bottom of this stamp. Also, other uneven inking seems to occur across the stamp. APEX is correct. It is a used 220 with inking problems.

Another image

Good thread, thanks, never knew of stand alone cap on right; but now I will have to recheck all of my 220's as I always looked at left 2 first and if it didn't have a cap on it then I didn't look further. I'm such rookie and way too honest. How embarrassing..

See figure 2 from the right side.

Well, you need to read the entire thread and the other linked threads again, then. Almost everyone is stating that it does NOT exist, and is an inking anomaly, etc. Go ahead and check, and post any that you feel are possibilities, but be prepared for comments.

I do Canadian and Provinces only...BUT, I have lots of these stamps (and hundreds of other American stamps).

Would it be worth while spending more time on Americans stamps..???

Robert

What about the right side view??? Looks like a slightly over inked copy. Prior one has inking problem under "POS" of Postage. When I see some ink issues, I ignore the cap on either 2.

The scan quality is so poor, it makes it difficult to comment. Certainly looks like simple over-inking, though. The two below were scanned at very high resolution (4800 dpi), but you can also do it at 1200 dpi. If I don't see the small dot below the T of cents, then the scan is not clear enough. This is one of the many that I have, and it is NOT a 220b, but just an example for the scanning quality.

"spots" is unique. The cert is basically lowest cost for highest value and if you follow Scott's catalog then by difference the cert was a dream for a deal. Bring your "spots".

It is interesting though. There are some that have been certified "Cap on right 2" at APS. I have one more to submit to them and hopefully PF cert submits his...I am looking at some of these pics and I do notice modified cap on both 2's . The one that I am going to submit has "spots" on the left 2 but not where the plate variety shows the cap. Of course "spots" on right 2 perhaps even a bit clearer on the right but it is not as nice as "spots" even with the crease. I'll submit it to this thread after it is certified. It could be a forgery as far as I know. "spots" is good.

... unless you're a teenager with a date this evening, of course.

No comment...

The one here with cut out for emphasis clearly has inking problems all over the right two! See my articles about all the relief breaks that include the right two in their sequences. Particularly Relief Breaks C and E with long sequences. Spots are NOT relief breaks! So far, no example above has shown a known relief break - much less a 220b! Friends, look before you leap! Do research on what is already published - 60 or 70 articles over nearly 80 years on the 220 relief breaks on 220. Some very well known philatelist (excluding me) have studied and written about this stamp. Oh, and a really rare relief stage is worth about what the used Scott catalogue says a normal used copy is worth. If fact, a little less because it is a "damaged" copy.

I received some word today about how "spots" was certified. Basically from what I understand APS will defer to inking abnormalities for "Cap on Right 2". This is how they determined the wording "spots[']" cert about the inherent cap on right 2 and basically any since caps differ Read...


"Note: There is mention below the listing for a SCN 220 of what appears to be a 'Cap' on the right number '2' in the Scott Specialized Catalogue. It is mentioned by Lester Brookman in his book (The United States Postage Stamps of the 19"* Century, 1967, page 29. It reads: "It is on this stamp that the interesting varieties "Cap on left 2" and "Cap on both 2" occur. Occasionally a stamp will be found that appears to have a "Cap" on the right "2" only, but this is now generally considered to be only an inking variety."

Also on page 31 it reads. "Trivial variations in the caps can be ascertained upon examination of a quantity of stamps and as a matter of fact a progressive variation can be noted. These variations were brought about by a breakdown of the metal of the transfer roll.""