Cerebus3000

Is that a mycomicshop bar code? They do grade pretty strictly/harshly by some standards. Is that bottom staple rusty? Is that a tear showing about half way down the rear spine? Any interior rips, staining, etc? As the previous poster mentioned, more/better pics could help, but it does look quite a bit better than a 3.0 to me.

Congrats @zzutak.  I am pleased I didn't embarrass myself, but I am going to have to review that Superman to figure out where I went so wrong..

Submitted. Went with my gut. Hope I am not too embarrassed. Those were tough books for me.

Will submit very soon...almost done.

On 5/5/2024 at 8:24 PM, Axelrod said:

Thanks Mike! 

And congrats to everyone else!

This will likely never happen again, so, I will take it!

Thanks Mike, thanks all, congrats all. This is also likely the only time I finish in the top three.  I have to note, the last thing I did before sending in my grades this round was change the 8.0 that I had given to SS 10 down to a 7.5.  Literally had 8.0 typed into my message to Mike, stared at the screen for five minutes and then made the switch.  Grrr...could have been fighting for first.  Very happy to be here though.  I'm not conceding to @zzutak but, I am pretty sure he said his grading focus is on the older mid grade comics...I think I am in trouble.

On 5/4/2024 at 10:20 PM, WilliamLunt said:

I looked at the same entry in the grading bible as well

6.0 - 7.0 - heavy rust with significant paper migration

This was my starting point, it can be really hard with ambiguous terms like significant. Because the migration was confined to the interior of the book I didn't consider the migration 'significant' so I thought the grade floor for this book was going to be higher than a 7.0 (please don't come after me too hard, it's just my opinion)

I went down the thought process of, what is the grade without the staple rust. It looks to be in VF/NM territory and then I downgraded a full point down to 8.0. I considered that this book could of came back a 7.5 but thought the book had enough eye appeal for a higher grade.

That being said, would I be rather have another 8.0 vs this book if I had a choice? absolutely.
 

That is pretty much exactly my thought process on SW 8, including considering a 7.5 and not wanting to own an 8.0 with that defect.

Of the top 20 contestants in the contest (as of round three) there were 7 bulls eyes, and 8 people within one grade. If the grade was actually 7.5 there would be 4 bulls eyes and 10 people off by one grade.  If the grade was 7.0 there would be 3 bulls eyes and 5 people off by one grade.  Perhaps guessing the grade on that one comic is why people are in the top twenty this round, but many of those people are consistently on the leader board. I think this shows that 8.0 was certainly a "predictable" grade per the published standards, given some tolerance for subjectivity. I really appreciated seeing that comic in this competition as a learning example, and learning is really why I am here.

@Superman2006 and/or @zzutak I would be interested in seeing some sort of comparison between the actual grades of this contest (each contest) with the average/mean/mode guessing of the cumulative top 10.  I suspect the people that have a proven history of "cracking the code" will be clustered more tightly around the CGC grades, and it might dispel some comments about CGC inconsistency.  Thanks for doing the reporting you already do, please feel free to ignore this suggestion.

Submitted. Congratulations to those who will inevitably push me down to fifth or seventh place.

On 5/1/2024 at 11:52 AM, jcjames said:

I didn't realize there was a published CGC grading guide! 

Not that I'd use it over OSGG which I prefer.

But for contests like this, the CGC guide could come in handy - though again, not so much for the SW8 book. 

 

 

A fair point to mention: OSGG does not allow rust migration at 8.0, however by 7.5 it says that "slight rust migration is allowed".  Both guides are close on this, but I think it really comes down to how you define "slight".

On 5/1/2024 at 7:50 AM, Axelrod said:

 Didn't CGC publish a grading guide recently?  Were rusty staples not covered in it?  Seems like this particular kind of defect ought to be easily quantifiable as far as "grade." 

I relied on the book to come up with my grade, but it was still a bit of a swag. The book says "slight to moderate rust that has not migrated to the paper can affect grade down to 9.0 or 9.2, while paper migration may move the grade lower.  Heavy rust with significant paper migration can fall between 6.0 and 7.0."

I didn't consider the migration to be "significant" (I have seen way worse) so I figured the grade must be lower than 9.0 and higher than 7.0.  I split the difference at 8.0 and got lucky (I was leaning toward 7.5).

2 bulls eyes and 3 points...somehow my best round. I was pretty sketchy on my Cap and SW grades.

I have been waiting the better part of two days to ask: what the heck is this?  It is a weird place for a crease/printer's crease.  It is visible without zooming and I figure at least three inches long, although it is very faint. At the very least it is some sort of scuff/ink loss.  In any case, I think this is an example of a defect that would be easier to grade in hand.  I am not confident about how I graded this book because of this defect.  If it is treated as a four inch colour breaking crease I think I am in trouble. I'll find out in a moment I guess.

On 4/26/2024 at 9:34 PM, scburdet said:

TBF, grading high grade comics in scans is hard. I feel like I'm trying to find the hidden defects

I have a tendency to zoom way in and say "dang, look at that crease" or "that stain is huge". Fortunately I usually catch myself by holding a comic up to the screen and sizing the picture before passing final judgment.

I agree with scburdet.  The bottom end for foxing is 4.0, and I would say that is some of the worst foxing I have seen.  Fortunately it's on the back cover.  Staining can take the grade much lower, but I think it would still be at about a 4.0 as it seems to be the only significant defect.

On 4/26/2024 at 5:33 PM, Cman429 said:

I'd much rather spend time staring at people's junk...

Submitted after much waffling.

On 4/23/2024 at 9:37 AM, Nschenks said:

Is this true? CGC 9.8's can have minor foxing?

The Official CGC Guide to Grading Comics does not mention foxing on the write up for 9.8.  The write up for 9.6 specifically says "the presence of one very small light stain, such as a spot of foxing" is allowed.  The table of defects also seems to have foxing top out at 9.6.

On 4/22/2024 at 7:05 PM, Lninefingers said:

I was sure that was a stain on the back of the power girl book and treated it accordingly. 
 

2 points otherwise, but 5 (yes, five) on that one  

kill me  

 

Looked like foxing to me. I guess I hit that a little harder than I should though.  Three bullseye but still managed 4 points.

Submitted.

In please.

After clean and press I think this is about a 5.0.

8.5

I would have leaned toward 7.5 but I didn’t, and still don’t, see a 9 inch diagonal crease anywhere.

It’s hard to grade when the comic has been left in that plastic case. There are lots of obvious defects, but it looks like a there may be issues that you would need to point out or at least provide more/better pictures. Having said that, I think you’re looking at a 1.5 to 1.8.