Guess the grade game!

[fantastic_four]

Sure - and a bunch of 9.0's from 2000 are 8.5's today. He made it seem like an old-label 9.0 is automatically a 9.4 book which just isn't the case.

 

Well they've definitely loosened on page quality, I've seen too many examples of it going up but not going down to believe that. I suspect they've loosened on defect weights too. Pressing makes that harder to pin down, as a significant portion of grade bumps are due to there simply being fewer defects on books upon regrading, which tends to blur our ability to determine why the grades are going up. My guess though is still that they're not as tight today as they were 10 years ago, but it's still an unsubstantiated hypothesis, I could be wrong, haven't seen enough evidence yet.

[VintageComics]

Sure - and a bunch of 9.0's from 2000 are 8.5's today. He made it seem like an old-label 9.0 is automatically a 9.4 book which just isn't the case.

 

Well they've definitely loosened on page quality, I've seen too many examples of it going up but not going down to believe that. I suspect they've loosened on defect weights too. Pressing makes that harder to pin down, as a significant portion of grade bumps are due to there simply being fewer defects on books upon regrading, which tends to blur our ability to determine why the grades are going up. My guess though is still that they're not as tight today as they were 10 years ago, but it's still an unsubstantiated hypothesis, I could be wrong, haven't seen enough evidence yet.

 

It's a fallacy to assume old label = undergraded.

 

I've seen just as many overgraded old label books as I've seen undergraded ones.

 

Maybe the standards may have shifted slightly but I think the general consistency is the same.

[143ksk]

 

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

 

The book in question in the first post of this thread once once in an old label 9.4 holder

[VintageComics]

 

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

 

The book in question in the first post of this thread once once in an old label 9.4 holder

 

Damn.

[casarachi]

 

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

 

The book in question in the first post of this thread once once in an old label 9.4 holder

 

if that's true, then that throws out the theory about grading standards evolving.

 

This thread ain't a shame after all then is it.

[LovinTheSurfer]

Aren't you supposed to buy the book...and not the label

[Boozad]

 

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

 

The book in question in the first post of this thread once once in an old label 9.4 holder

 

if that's true, then that throws out the theory about grading standards evolving.

 

This thread ain't a shame after all then is it.

 

Yep. One book proves that every other book graded by CGC is graded incorrectly.

 

Oh, but the thing it does prove is that between three and six people who get paid to grade thought it was a 9.4 with the book in hand.

[casarachi]

Then why put a grade on the label. Just say "unrestored" or "restored", and list the details as much as possible on the label. State any defects & Don't say a grade. SIMPLE FIX!

 

NOW THIS would be an asset!

[trmoore54]

 

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

 

The book in question in the first post of this thread once once in an old label 9.4 holder

 

if that's true, then that throws out the theory about grading standards evolving.

 

This thread ain't a shame after all then is it.

 

Yep. One book proves that every other book graded by CGC is graded incorrectly.

 

Oh, but the thing it does prove is that between three and six people who get paid to grade thought it was a 9.4 with the book in hand.

 

Yep. It's empirical!

Sure hope you don't work in an FDA testing/approval lab...

[Boozad]

Then why put a grade on the label. Just say "unrestored" or "restored", and list the details as much as possible on the label. State any defects & Don't say a grade. SIMPLE FIX!

 

NOW THIS would be an asset!

 

MY GOD YOU ARE ING DENSE.

[LovinTheSurfer]

this thread is making my head hurt

[fantastic_four]

The book in question in the first post of this thread once once in an old label 9.4 holder

 

With the exact same serial number, meaning it was reholdered but not regraded. I just checked.

 

Sensation Comics #1 CGC 9.4 old-style label

 

Sensation Comics #1 CGC 9.4 new-style label

[fantastic_four]

This thread ain't a shame after all then is it.

 

No, but your presumptive arrogance is.

[Boozad]

The book in question in the first post of this thread once once in an old label 9.4 holder

 

With the exact same serial number, meaning it was reholdered but not regraded. I just checked.

 

Sensation Comics #1 CGC 9.4 old-style label

 

Sensation Comics #1 CGC 9.4 new-style label

 

I would place a safe bet that the book was at least looked over. Although the OP would argue the point, CGC do make sure that even reholders are actually the grade the label states so it will have been looked at.

 

They have integrity as a company, and they wouldn't send the book back out with 9.4 on the label if they didn't think it was. And it's the first time I've actually seen the book, and I find it unbelievable that the OP has caused this fustercluck of a thread over it.

[fantastic_four]

I would place a safe bet that the book was at least looked over. Although the OP would argue the point, CGC do make sure that even reholders are actually the grade the label states so it will have been looked at.

 

We don't know when the reholder occurred--it could have been 2003--nor do we know if they look it back over for anything other than shaking damage. Or if someone does know the specifics of what they look for when reholdering, please, do share.

[casarachi]

 

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

 

The book in question in the first post of this thread once once in an old label 9.4 holder

 

if that's true, then that throws out the theory about grading standards evolving.

 

This thread ain't a shame after all then is it.

 

Yep. One book proves that every other book graded by CGC is graded incorrectly.

 

Oh, but the thing it does prove is that between three and six people who get paid to grade thought it was a 9.4 with the book in hand.

 

Not 6, 2! The two TOP graders are the ones who make the call. They only use the under-graders to make the initial impression. But ultimately, it's 1 person. I think they would improve if they took the average grade given.

 

When I didn't make the senior baseball team in HS, I asked my coach why? He said "How can I put you on the team after my junior varsity coach cut you? How would it look?" So, the same year, my father took me to try out for the Boston Park League, which was double A college level, and I made the team. I was 16. Then it was in the papers, made the headlines. "Not good enough for MHS but good enough for the Boston Park League". That year, I played against the OLYMPIC team and went 2 for 3, and we won the championship, I batter 358. A year later when asked to go out for Varsity, which I refused, the coach admitted, they cut me from the baseball team because I wouldn't play football. I would have played football, but my father wouldn't let me because I was a concert pianist and he feared my fingers would be busted up. Which I'm glad he didn't let me.

 

I don't buy it that prior labels are discarded and the book is treated unbiased. Especially on a book of such high importance. They were probably confused and needed guidance so thought, "how can I lower the grade if THEY didn't?, this is a big # book!" This says a lot more than you assume. THIS is where the politics come into play. And if you think there's no politics in comics, your naive.

[Boozad]

And if you think there's no politics in comics, your naive.

 

My naive what?

[casarachi]

And if you think there's no politics in comics, your naive.

 

My naive what?

 

Yeah, your right, we all live in a utopia comic land .

[Boozad]

And if you think there's no politics in comics, your naive.

 

My naive what?

 

Yeah, your right,

 

My right what?

[Ze-man]

And if you think there's no politics in comics, your naive.

 

My naive what?

 

Yeah, your right,

 

My right what?

 

You're being funny.