• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

2008/09 GRADING CONTEST: Round 4

Started by nik,

125 posts in this topic

rza808

rza808

Posted
Posted

Guys just a observation but why have a grading contest when the books being judged are not considered graded correctly? It seems we are rewarding people for not grading properly(round 3). I would be pissed if I bought a book graded by a board member 9.2 and got that monster in the mail. Just my opinion. But I guess it makes the contest more exciting? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimm94

jimm94

Posted
Posted

Some of you guys must be the same dudes that yell at the refs during pop warner football games. It's just a contest for fun. Look, I thought the Round 3 book was a 7.0, but just because I was horribly wrong on that round doesn't mean CGC isn't accurately grading books the majority of the time. You always have to remember that we are looking at scans - Some flaws get grossly magnified, just as other flaws are hidden. You have to see and hold the book in your hands to get a true sense of the grade. If you aren't having fun, then don't play.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nik

nik

Posted
  • Author
Posted

My favorite part about these contests are when people moan and groan about a grade a book received :cloud9:

 

Then I love hearing, if that received xx then all my books are xx and its time to send some in over and over and over again, like a broken record lol

 

I can honestly say for every "gift grade" or "Nik bump" book I have received :screwy: there are many, many that were total disappointments.

 

So for those special people who are such tight graders, here is my favorite quote for you, Do you feel lucky punk? :baiting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ArAich

ArAich

Posted
Posted

I get a kick out of the people that so "no way that's a 9.2!" ...well...I had it at 9.2 ...CGC had it at 9.2 ...24 other people had it at 9.2 ...

 

Are you guys saying that we suck at grading and you are the be all at grading...perhaps the lowballers need to pipe down and tighten up there grading abilities...

 

Just an observation... 2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rza808

rza808

Posted
Posted

I truly dont think that is a 9.2 or close but I am not whining just concerned that I might get a 9.2 like that from you guys in the selling thread, which is all really small worry. For newbs on the other hand they might take that as a cue to grade their books. I just hope people dont take some of these grades as standard. And just because CGC says it so doesnt make it so. Guess I will have to be more careful is all. No moaning I dont biyatch much cept when the Spurs lose in the playoffs. It is from scans and hard to percieve condition in 3d from a 2d :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
toro

toro

Posted
Posted

I sent two copies of ASM Annual #3 into CGC a few years ago. I thought one was 9.4 and the other 9.2. The one that I thought was a 9.2 came back as a 9.6. The one I thought was a 9.4 came back as a 7.5, obviously I missed something both ways. But I think the grading contests help me find some good points about some books that I thought are lower and find some other flaws in my own that I would have never seen without this contest.

 

I also think they are just plain fun. Maybe not for Nik, but this contest is what got me hooked on this forum and I haven't left since that first contest in 2004.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
I get a kick out of the people that so "no way that's a 9.2!" ...well...I had it at 9.2 ...CGC had it at 9.2 ...24 other people had it at 9.2 ...

 

Are you guys saying that we suck at grading and you are the be all at grading...perhaps the lowballers need to pipe down and tighten up there grading abilities...

 

Just an observation... 2c

 

That's what I'm saying..... :baiting:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ArAich

ArAich

Posted
Posted
I get a kick out of the people that so "no way that's a 9.2!" ...well...I had it at 9.2 ...CGC had it at 9.2 ...24 other people had it at 9.2 ...

 

Are you guys saying that we suck at grading and you are the be all at grading...perhaps the lowballers need to pipe down and tighten up there grading abilities...

 

Just an observation... 2c

 

That's what I'm saying..... :baiting:

 

 

 

meh

 

 

wait...I mean... lol

 

 

wait...I mean... :frustrated:

 

 

my head hurts... :sick:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
I get a kick out of the people that so "no way that's a 9.2!" ...well...I had it at 9.2 ...CGC had it at 9.2 ...24 other people had it at 9.2 ...

 

Are you guys saying that we suck at grading and you are the be all at grading...perhaps the lowballers need to pipe down and tighten up there grading abilities...

 

Just an observation... 2c

 

That's what I'm saying..... :baiting:

 

 

 

meh

 

 

wait...I mean... lol

 

 

wait...I mean... :frustrated:

 

 

my head hurts... :sick:

 

 

:acclaim:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
Posted
I sent two copies of ASM Annual #3 into CGC a few years ago. I thought one was 9.4 and the other 9.2. The one that I thought was a 9.2 came back as a 9.6. The one I thought was a 9.4 came back as a 7.5, obviously I missed something both ways. But I think the grading contests help me find some good points about some books that I thought are lower and find some other flaws in my own that I would have never seen without this contest.

 

I also think they are just plain fun. Maybe not for Nik, but this contest is what got me hooked on this forum and I haven't left since that first contest in 2004.

 

:sumo: And toro is a good grader. The reality is that we are grading from (oversized) scans here and the bulk of the players, frankly, just don't know how to grade.

 

In hand, we often overlook defects because WE JUST DON'T TAKE THE TIME TO LOOK AT A BOOK CRITICALLY before sending it in. We also have a tendency to grade our own books both harsher and less harsh at various times. We are not perfect.

 

It's a tough job to consistently get the grades you expect from CGC, but I have to say (with no compensation here, express or implied) the boys at CGC generally get it right. I have never seen them off by more than a grade imho, and as Stevie B. used to say, if you are unhappy with a grade that you receive, crack it out and learn from it. :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
Posted
Some of you guys must be the same dudes that yell at the refs during pop warner football games. It's just a contest for fun. Look, I thought the Round 3 book was a 7.0, but just because I was horribly wrong on that round doesn't mean CGC isn't accurately grading books the majority of the time. You always have to remember that we are looking at scans - Some flaws get grossly magnified, just as other flaws are hidden. You have to see and hold the book in your hands to get a true sense of the grade. If you aren't having fun, then don't play.

 

 

It was a touchdown, dang it! lol

 

:applause: (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
I sent two copies of ASM Annual #3 into CGC a few years ago. I thought one was 9.4 and the other 9.2. The one that I thought was a 9.2 came back as a 9.6. The one I thought was a 9.4 came back as a 7.5, obviously I missed something both ways. But I think the grading contests help me find some good points about some books that I thought are lower and find some other flaws in my own that I would have never seen without this contest.

 

I also think they are just plain fun. Maybe not for Nik, but this contest is what got me hooked on this forum and I haven't left since that first contest in 2004.

 

:sumo: And toro is a good grader. The reality is that we are grading from (oversized) scans here and the bulk of the players, frankly, just don't know how to grade.

 

In hand, we often overlook defects because WE JUST DON'T TAKE THE TIME TO LOOK AT A BOOK CRITICALLY before sending it in. We also have a tendency to grade our own books both harsher and less harsh at various times. We are not perfect.

 

 

Who is this "we" you keep referring to? :insane:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
Posted
I sent two copies of ASM Annual #3 into CGC a few years ago. I thought one was 9.4 and the other 9.2. The one that I thought was a 9.2 came back as a 9.6. The one I thought was a 9.4 came back as a 7.5, obviously I missed something both ways. But I think the grading contests help me find some good points about some books that I thought are lower and find some other flaws in my own that I would have never seen without this contest.

 

I also think they are just plain fun. Maybe not for Nik, but this contest is what got me hooked on this forum and I haven't left since that first contest in 2004.

 

:sumo: And toro is a good grader. The reality is that we are grading from (oversized) scans here and the bulk of the players, frankly, just don't know how to grade.

 

In hand, we often overlook defects because WE JUST DON'T TAKE THE TIME TO LOOK AT A BOOK CRITICALLY before sending it in. We also have a tendency to grade our own books both harsher and less harsh at various times. We are not perfect.

 

 

Who is this "we" you keep referring to? :insane:

Why, it's the Royal "We", of course. :insane:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing