Shark

Tom.....my understanding of double covers has always been that the better cover of the two is what the overall grade of the book was. Example: Outer cover 9.0, inner cover 9.6, overall grade 9.6. Has that changed? I have books in my own collection where that's exactly the case. I'm sure Christian does as well since he's a big double cover collector.

Thanks for the comment. Makes me feel much better.

No, not the first time. I've participated before but I don't believe I played in last year's tournament so it's been awhile. It's my fault and nobody else's. I was too focused on the "the inner cover is usually higher grade than the outer cover" double cover scenario. Had I asked one simple question to Blowie in the PM all of this would have been avoided. I'll definitely remember this for next year's tournament.

Yep, and I should have asked questions before attempting to do so - and paid more attention to the wording in Blowie's initial PM. That alone caused me to get booted from the tournament. I was actually closer on grade on 2 of the books than my opponent and we tied on the other one. My experience and knowledge of the way double covers are graded actually got in the way this time. Live and learn.....live and learn.....

I of course missed that.

I just checked the threads for this year's seeding round, round of 96 and this last round. Nothing is stated about double cover books being graded only by the outer cover. Even though it may have been stated in previous years' contests, it seems that is something that should be prominently stated in the initial post in every round. Had I known that was the case (assuming it is), I would have guessed 1.5 to 1.8 on the 2.0 double cover book and easily advanced.

Where is that stated?

My understanding of double covers has always been that the inner cover is usually higher grade than the outer cover (for obvious reasons). In the case of this particular book (the Rudolph) and any other double cover with significant wear, maybe it would be better if a scan of the interior cover was posted as well.

I guessed 6.5 on the 1st book and you entered it in the spreadsheet as 8.5.

I only lost by 5 points (Blowie entered my 1st guess incorrectly) so I don't feel too bad about not advancing. But I blew the grade on the double cover Rudolph (guessed 4.0). So did you guys grade it that low because of the top of the spine? I couldn't tell whether the inner cover was split or not. Go get 'em letsgrumble!

I was 1 grade off on 2 books, had one bullseye (the X-Men) but bombed on the double cover book. Those things are tough. Couldn't tell if the inner cover had a spine slit at the top corner or not so went with 4.0. Had I gone 3.0 I would have advanced.

You're in deep doo-doo then.

I must have a good score because I got this response:

That's cool if letsgrumble hasn't turned in his grades yet.

As soon as he sent that intial message, I said "I bet you say that to all the girls." This is confirmation that he did.

Nailed the Rudolph and X-Men, thought the Aquaman could go 9.6 but went with 9.4 (saw a couple of tiny spine flaws) and went with 9.0 on the That Wilkin Boy #1.

Grades are in.

9-9 for me

I was either sandbagging or have no clue what I'm doing. Probably the latter.

Maybe CGC will do you a favor and scan all of those pre-1975 books for you for free to speed up the process.

Think I've missed out on this the last couple of years. Ready to give it another shot.

CLOSED

$225 shipped in the USA via Priority Mail box.

You obviously do otherwise you wouldn't have posted in here.