CGC Registry Awards - predictions for 2010 winners?

[Bosco685]

Which, based on looking at the award-winning sets, seems to be pretty much the criteria they're using to judge the sets currently :shrug:

This isn't correct, and you know it when looking at some of the sets that have been selected over the past few years.

 

Even one winner this year, who I feel is a fantastic person and one of the nicest forumites you can run into, was surprised he won and announced now he would be adding pictures and details, post-selection.

 

Does that sound like presentment is currently part of the core criteria?

[Bosco685]

As far as discussing your set - I'm not going there. That is a losing battle attempting to discuss whether or not someone's set should win an award.

It's irrelevant whether you feel that my MM set should have won an award or not. The only reason I brought it up was to counter your claim that a "BEST AGE SET [is] based just on having a massive amount of books".

It matters if you are trying to use that as an argument the entire process allows for all non-long running sets to compete.

 

That's like me going to a company call center, listening to one good call from a customer and proclaiming, "See, we're golden. Don't change a thing!"

[dikran]

And that's okay to have a difference of opinion. I just wasn't going to accept that argument "the judges and I...."

Which is not the argument I made at all. I said that when it comes to picking Best in Age sets, the books should be the 1st priority and presentation a distant 2nd. And that that seems to be the same criteria used by CGC.

 

 

And what I am suggesting is more than the presentment, though you seem to keep thinking that is all I am saying. The criteria, in my opinion, would be for BEST IN AGE SETS:

 

1) Most complete sets (100% of books, or as close as is humanly possible).

 

2) Highest scoring sets.

 

3) Presentment of sets considered so as to portray the best examples of what a registry should look like.

Which, based on looking at the award-winning sets, seems to be pretty much the criteria they're using to judge the sets currently :shrug:

 

 

As far as discussing your set - I'm not going there. That is a losing battle attempting to discuss whether or not someone's set should win an award.

It's irrelevant whether you feel that my MM set should have won an award or not. The only reason I brought it up was to counter your claim that a "BEST AGE SET [is] based just on having a massive amount of books".

 

Well I think the point of having THREE winners per age also showcases that ''number of books'' alone is not the sole indicator of winning. Some sets are huge and traverse multiple ages while others are tiny and niche and luckily both types have been chosen by CGC as winners in the past.

[NewEnglandGothic]

No slight to the Locke & Key set, since it is a great set, but due to the great coverstock used 9.9s and 10s from IDW in that time period are common. If I were to pickup a Locke or G.I. Joe on release day, submit it, and have it come back less than 9.9 I'd be upset with myself.

 

IDW has slipped in quality as of late, but pulling a 9.9 or 10.0 from a publisher such as Marvel or DC these days is a rare feat. Sometimes just getting a 9.8 for a certain issue is an adventure due to cheap coverstock being used.

 

And also, since my 1991 X-Men run was pretty much all self-subbed, the effort that went into that was quite substational, and continues to be.

I had a feeling with Jerel's set the argument of IDW being a given 9.9/10.0 was going to come up. I hear that often when IDW books are discussed, but I also realize how many books Jerel submitted to get those high scores, and how many 9.8's he has sold off as undercopies.

 

So what about Marvel and DC books being so heavily produced over the years, and the census having no shortage of high-grade copies, it's too easy to find 9.8's or higher? Let's be a little fair here.

 

Beachbum, I never said finding your books and submitting them was not an effort. But you also run a business that caters to folks wanting guaranteed 9.8's or better which gives you resources the common collector doesn't have.

 

That doesn't take away from the search effort involved. And please realize I didn't bring up your set as an example, nor was I knocking your set or its award.

I'm sick of being slammed for collecting a series from IDW. It's not my fault, I enjoy the series from a New Hampshire writer(Dre, you also have to rememember, I am in New Hampshire and don't get out to conventions-I depend on any help from anyone-not many books achieve 9.9 or better when they finally arrive up here). I have been hearing everyone and their momma's can score a mint Locke & Key book, and that's great, but it's really heartbreaking when head scratchers like this come up, "Try trading your complete 10.0 run of Locke & Key for that one(Wolverine #1 CGC 10). Does the phrase, "comparative scarcity" mean anything to you?" from CGC celebrated newsletter writer Michael McFadden. It was like he was talking directly to me and I just wanted to just pull my set permanently from the Registry last year. It's why I didn't add my personal descriptions I wrote. It's why I route for everyone else too. I just figured the judges wouldn't take anything with such commonly high grade books as serious as I do on a day to day basis. I might not care to win anymore, but no one can deny my passion for my title. When I lost my job last year, I let my back tooth rot to afford the high grade Head Games #1 issues when they hit 10's from a seller and I sold a prized 2nd print in 9.9 so I could afford a CGC 10 #6(and have regretted ever since).The McFadden Article

[Bosco685]

 

 

I'm sick of being slammed for collecting a series from IDW. It's not my fault, I enjoy the series from a New Hampshire writer(Dre, you also have to rememember, I am in New Hampshire and don't get out to conventions-I depend on any help from anyone-not many books achieve 9.9 or better when they finally arrive up here). I have been hearing everyone and their momma's can score a mint Locke & Key book, and that's great, but it's really heartbreaking when head scratchers like this come up, "Try trading your complete 10.0 run of Locke & Key for that one(Wolverine #1 CGC 10). Does the phrase, "comparative scarcity" mean anything to you?" from CGC celebrated CGC newsletter writer Michael McFadden. It was like he was talking directly to me and I just wanted to just pull my set permanently from the Registry last year. It's why I didn't add my personal descriptions I wrote. It's why I route for everyone else too. I just figured the judges wouldn't take anything with such commonly high grade books as serious as I do on a day to day basis. I might not care to win anymore, but no one can deny my passion for my title. When I lost my job last year, I let my back tooth rot to afford the high grade Head Games #1 issues when they hit 10's from a seller and I sold a prized 2nd print in 9.9 so I could afford a CGC 10 #6(and have regretted ever since).The McFadden Article

[BeachBum]

No slight to the Locke & Key set, since it is a great set, but due to the great coverstock used 9.9s and 10s from IDW in that time period are common. If I were to pickup a Locke or G.I. Joe on release day, submit it, and have it come back less than 9.9 I'd be upset with myself.

 

IDW has slipped in quality as of late, but pulling a 9.9 or 10.0 from a publisher such as Marvel or DC these days is a rare feat. Sometimes just getting a 9.8 for a certain issue is an adventure due to cheap coverstock being used.

 

And also, since my 1991 X-Men run was pretty much all self-subbed, the effort that went into that was quite substational, and continues to be.

I had a feeling with Jerel's set the argument of IDW being a given 9.9/10.0 was going to come up. I hear that often when IDW books are discussed, but I also realize how many books Jerel submitted to get those high scores, and how many 9.8's he has sold off as undercopies.

 

So what about Marvel and DC books being so heavily produced over the years, and the census having no shortage of high-grade copies, it's too easy to find 9.8's or higher? Let's be a little fair here.

 

Beachbum, I never said finding your books and submitting them was not an effort. But you also run a business that caters to folks wanting guaranteed 9.8's or better which gives you resources the common collector doesn't have.

 

That doesn't take away from the search effort involved. And please realize I didn't bring up your set as an example, nor was I knocking your set or its award.

I'm sick of being slammed for collecting a series from IDW. It's not my fault, I enjoy the series from a New Hampshire writer(Dre, you also have to rememember, I am in New Hampshire and don't get out to conventions-I depend on any help from anyone-not many books achieve 9.9 or better when they finally arrive up here). I have been hearing everyone and their momma's can score a mint Locke & Key book, and that's great, but it's really heartbreaking when head scratchers like this come up, "Try trading your complete 10.0 run of Locke & Key for that one(Wolverine #1 CGC 10). Does the phrase, "comparative scarcity" mean anything to you?" from CGC celebrated CGC newsletter writer Michael McFadden. It was like he was talking directly to me and I just wanted to just pull my set permanently from the Registry last year. It's why I didn't add my personal descriptions I wrote. It's why I route for everyone else too. I just figured the judges wouldn't take anything with such commonly high grade books as serious as I do on a day to day basis. I might not care to win anymore, but no one can deny my passion for my title. When I lost my job last year, I let my back tooth rot to afford the high grade Head Games #1 issues when they hit 10's from a seller and I sold a prized 2nd print in 9.9 so I could afford a CGC 10 #6(and have regretted ever since).The McFadden Article

 

I wasn't slamming you, or your set Jerel. I was just pointing out that there are a lot of 9.9s & 10.0s for IDW books. If you got to Ebay right now there are 11 Locke & Key available for sale at this moment.

 

Bosco's point was your set has a ton of 9.9 & 10.0s, but for that published run they are common.

 

And plus my LCSs around here don't get many in, just enough to get an incentive usually.

[Marvelfangirl]

 

 

I'm sick of being slammed for collecting a series from IDW. It's not my fault, I enjoy the series from a New Hampshire writer(Dre, you also have to rememember, I am in New Hampshire and don't get out to conventions-I depend on any help from anyone-not many books achieve 9.9 or better when they finally arrive up here). I have been hearing everyone and their momma's can score a mint Locke & Key book, and that's great, but it's really heartbreaking when head scratchers like this come up, "Try trading your complete 10.0 run of Locke & Key for that one(Wolverine #1 CGC 10). Does the phrase, "comparative scarcity" mean anything to you?" from CGC celebrated CGC newsletter writer Michael McFadden. It was like he was talking directly to me and I just wanted to just pull my set permanently from the Registry last year. It's why I didn't add my personal descriptions I wrote. It's why I route for everyone else too. I just figured the judges wouldn't take anything with such commonly high grade books as serious as I do on a day to day basis. I might not care to win anymore, but no one can deny my passion for my title. When I lost my job last year, I let my back tooth rot to afford the high grade Head Games #1 issues when they hit 10's from a seller and I sold a prized 2nd print in 9.9 so I could afford a CGC 10 #6(and have regretted ever since).The McFadden Article

Your set is awesome Jerel

[NewEnglandGothic]

I wasn't slamming you, or your set Jerel. I was just pointing out that there are a lot of 9.9s & 10.0s for IDW books. If you got to Ebay right now there are 11 Locke & Key available for sale at this moment.

 

Bosco's point was your set has a ton of 9.9 & 10.0s, but for that published run they are common.

I'm sorry Dre, I was just venting. It just all adds up sometimes . We don't ever talk, but I have a lot of respect for your X-Men collecting focus on your books and if I didn't say it earlier congratulations on your Registry win and your impending wedding.

[NewEnglandGothic]

What next - someone states, "Bosco is having a meltdown," because I'm voicing a suggestion of change?

No, you are right for bringing this up. I sit here today fighting to read all of this from my "dial up" connection on my "stayaction". This discussion is long overdue after seeing your sets(I'm bias because I helped a girl get into graded Crow comics), Adam's set, Cheryl's set, Steve's set, and the list goes on..., get ignored. There's nothing, I can say that won't make me look like a sore loser, but then again, I wasn't really trying this year too. As it stands now, I have zero interest in the competing in next year's contest if nothing changes.

[BeachBum]

I wasn't slamming you, or your set Jerel. I was just pointing out that there are a lot of 9.9s & 10.0s for IDW books. If you got to Ebay right now there are 11 Locke & Key available for sale at this moment.

 

Bosco's point was your set has a ton of 9.9 & 10.0s, but for that published run they are common.

I'm sorry Dre, I was just venting. It just all adds up sometimes . We don't ever talk, but I have a lot of respect for your X-Men collecting focus on your books and if I didn't say it earlier congratulations on your Registry win and your impending wedding.

 

(thumbs u

[NewEnglandGothic]

 

 

I'm sick of being slammed for collecting a series from IDW. It's not my fault, I enjoy the series from a New Hampshire writer(Dre, you also have to rememember, I am in New Hampshire and don't get out to conventions-I depend on any help from anyone-not many books achieve 9.9 or better when they finally arrive up here). I have been hearing everyone and their momma's can score a mint Locke & Key book, and that's great, but it's really heartbreaking when head scratchers like this come up, "Try trading your complete 10.0 run of Locke & Key for that one(Wolverine #1 CGC 10). Does the phrase, "comparative scarcity" mean anything to you?" from CGC celebrated CGC newsletter writer Michael McFadden. It was like he was talking directly to me and I just wanted to just pull my set permanently from the Registry last year. It's why I didn't add my personal descriptions I wrote. It's why I route for everyone else too. I just figured the judges wouldn't take anything with such commonly high grade books as serious as I do on a day to day basis. I might not care to win anymore, but no one can deny my passion for my title. When I lost my job last year, I let my back tooth rot to afford the high grade Head Games #1 issues when they hit 10's from a seller and I sold a prized 2nd print in 9.9 so I could afford a CGC 10 #6(and have regretted ever since).The McFadden Article

Your set is awesome Jerel

Thank you Sarah and don't look so glum Nick. There also was a November 2009 article from Mr. McFadden that made me really excited to go back into collecting the Crown of Shadows arc when it started too. I really don't collect for worth, I collect for me. I try to drum interest in my favorite title too. The "Appreciation Thread" was at a paltry 750 views and I helped rally it up to 13,000(I'm still waiting for someone to tell me to shut up). If anyone new started reading it, then I succeeded .

[Bosco685]

If anyone new started reading it, then I succeeded .

 

[NewEnglandGothic]

OK, I am now at 18 Kbps on my dial up connection, so I'm shutting down before I get kicked off. Bye.

 

 

[cheetah]

What next - someone states, "Bosco is having a meltdown," because I'm voicing a suggestion of change?

No, you are right for bringing this up. I sit here today fighting to read all of this from my "dial up" connection on my "stayaction". This discussion is long overdue after seeing your sets(I'm bias because I helped a girl get into graded Crow comics), Adam's set, Cheryl's set, Steve's set, and the list goes on..., get ignored. There's nothing, I can say that won't make me look like a sore loser, but then again, I wasn't really trying this year too. As it stands now, I have zero interest in the competing in next year's contest if nothing changes.

 

I don't really think those sets get ignored. They are great sets and you guys ought to be proud of what you've put together. But only a total of 15 sets a year get recognition. There are probably hundreds of sets each year that deserve recognition. The number of complete sets this year that had full scans and write-ups has got to be significantly higher than last year. Just keep collecting and caring about your runs and, who knows, you might win next year. Heck, all of you might win next year. I hope I have a few sets in the running next year.

[Bosco685]

I don't really think those sets get ignored. They are great sets and you guys ought to be proud of what you've put together. But only a total of 15 sets a year get recognition. There are probably hundreds of sets each year that deserve recognition. The number of complete sets this year that had full scans and write-ups has got to be significantly higher than last year. Just keep collecting and caring about your runs and, who knows, you might win next year. Heck, all of you might win next year. I hope I have a few sets in the running next year.

Very nice of you to say that. In my case, I realize there are much better sets than mine, with loads of work applied. I just want to see them recognized for their efforts.

 

But I'll continue to maintain my sets for the fun and to educate.

[DrWatson]

I think what Boscoe is really concentrating on falls in line with the Best Presentation sets.

Four words: judge's subjectivity, nothing but.

 

For Best Presentation we are looking for scans and personal descriptions. Yes, it is easy to copy the Wiki or Comic Database entry for the book, but does that really show your passion for collecting? We are hoping that by offering the comment section that you will want to explain what that issue means to you, why you collected it, why it is a key part of your collection, etc... Just because you type something in there doesn't mean that you are going to be a winner, it takes a bit more effort and we hope that you appreciate that as collectors who are passionate about the hobby. (thumbs u

I don't disagree, but as a Modern collector it's hard to be passionate about the second or third printing, the four or five variant covers, the Spider-Man/Deadpool/Wolverine crossover or the reprint issue that collects the first twelve issues in order to make a quick buck that are now required to complete a set and still convey that as if it were something you are seeing or feeling for the first time.

 

My only complaint, and it isn't really a complaint as I think a lot of the CGC cast and crew, is that it would be nice to see a little more variety (fresh faces in the form of winners) from year to year.

 

All of you involved go a good job and it's appreciated, at least on my part anyway.

[shortstack comics]

I'm sure part of CGC's motivations in having a contest is not only to make our little hobby a lot of fun, but also having fanatical collectors display their books to encourage even more collectors.

 

Take that to next step for CGC and you'll see the reason behind the registry and the message boards.

 

The days of guaranteed 9.8 Marvel is gone.

 

Hence, how I bid up a modern Deadpool book from the current series to $60 last night on eBay and still didn't win the book.

 

Well I think the point of having THREE winners per age also showcases that ''number of books'' alone is not the sole indicator of winning.

 

Couldn't have put it better myself.

 

Some sets are huge and traverse multiple ages while others are tiny and niche and luckily both types have been chosen by CGC as winners in the past.

 

+1

 

I'll continue to maintain my sets for the fun and to educate.

 

Then quit your griping That really should be the real reason we all do it (otherwise we have a bad and expensive compulsion)

 

My only complaint, and it isn't really a complaint as I think a lot of the CGC cast and crew, is that it would be nice to see a little more variety (fresh faces in the form of winners) from year to year.

 

+1

[shortstack comics]

As far as doing a "people's choice" version of the registry awards, there's no reason we couldn't do it already on the message board. If we took the initiative to run one ourselves in a thread (fairly), I'm sure it wouldn't be difficult to talk the good people into CGC at creating a little icon that could go on the sets that won.

 

 

[Bosco685]

Then quit your griping That really should be the real reason we all do it (otherwise we have a bad and expensive compulsion)

 

The bad man made me cry. And here I was ready to vote for Deadpool next year.

[seanfingh]

Then quit your griping That really should be the real reason we all do it (otherwise we have a bad and expensive compulsion)

 

The bad man made me cry. And here I was ready to vote for Deadpool next year.

 

What about disappointment and customer-facing process reviews? Damn, Jason, you get away with murder.