The 2010 Nik Memorial Grading Contest *Round 6*

[joe_collector]

But he can't be wrong, so the contest is either fixed against him or everyone cheated.

 

Hardly, as it would have been Mickey Mouse to get hat 7.0 dead-on had using the Census data. If data mining the CGC grades is fine with you, then that's cool, but I chose not to.

 

This is NOT about me, as I couldn't care less about winning or losing, but these latest results unquestionably show that something is definitely up.

[DiceX]

At least I don't cheat.

I will not have you singling out an individual and accusing them of cheating. Is that clear?

 

I am not accusing him specifically, but I will state that some people are, and if that rubs you the wrong way, then boot me out of the contest.

 

I don't play with cheaters, so it's no big loss.

 

 

I knew I sensed a flaming drama queen exit coming. Run along, little boy.

 

I can't believe you'd say that. This being the first time it's ever happened and all.

 

 

[DrWatson]

At least I don't cheat.

I will not have you singling out an individual and accusing them of cheating. Is that clear?

 

I am not accusing him specifically, but I will state that some people are, and if that rubs you the wrong way, then boot me out of the contest.

 

I don't play with cheaters, so it's no big loss.

 

 

I knew I sensed a flaming drama queen exit coming. Run along, little boy.

Same goes for everyone. He's entitled to his opinion, the same as you, but it is not to approach a personal or individual level. Thank you.

[shadroch]

There is NO RULE that says you cannot use external data or that you can't compare it to other CGC slabs or do "research".

 

This contest is what you make of it. You don't have to compete with the others. You only have to compete with yourself.

 

And maybe some learning will take place and you will all end up better graders. (thumbs u

 

 

 

 

Amen, brother.

I wasn't going to enter since I'll be away the month of Feb. and more than likely will miss enough rounds that I'll be DQ'd, but this is fun and to see how my grades stack up against CGCs, not anyone else.

You guys running this are doing yeomans work and deserve better than the grief you are getting.

[shadroch]

Can we assume that since Angel and the Ape 77 isn't in the Census, none of these books are in the Census?

 

It's Showcase 77.

[joe_collector]

There is NO RULE that says you cannot use external data or that you can't compare it to other CGC slabs or do "research".

 

Perfect, then I will be posting CGC Census data for all books (in a separate thread) and evening the playing field for everyone.

 

Thanks for posting that Sacko, and that's really all I wanted to hear. I was under a different "gentleman's agreement" assumption about this contest, but no skin off my nose, as I'm killer with numbers and statistics.

[DiceX]

But he can't be wrong, so the contest is either fixed against him or everyone cheated.

 

Hardly, as it would have been Mickey Mouse to get hat 7.0 dead-on had using the Census data. If data mining the CGC grades is fine with you, then that's cool, but I chose not to.

 

This is NOT about me, as I couldn't care less about winning or losing, but these latest results unquestionably show that something is definitely up.

 

The great grading contest conspiracy of 2004. 2005. 2006. 2007. 2008. 2009. 2010. 2011.

 

 

[sckao]

 

If you're going to be away, just let me know and you won't be DQ'd. Anybody who wants to re-enter after being eliminated is fine in any case. You just start or continue at a disadvantage in scoring. (thumbs u

[Shark]

And maybe some learning will take place and you will all end up completely confused over how CGC grades comics. (thumbs u

 

Fixed that for ya Shin. (thumbs u

[joe_collector]

But he can't be wrong, so the contest is either fixed against him or everyone cheated.

 

Hardly, as it would have been Mickey Mouse to get hat 7.0 dead-on had using the Census data. If data mining the CGC grades is fine with you, then that's cool, but I chose not to.

 

This is NOT about me, as I couldn't care less about winning or losing, but these latest results unquestionably show that something is definitely up.

 

The great grading contest conspiracy of 2004. 2005. 2006. 2007. 2008. 2009. 2010. 2011.

 

Just remember that there was a confirmed scam in one of Nik's contests, where some people got his ID from posted books and were inputting consecutive numbers (back when CGC did this) to get the grades from his submissions, so don't act like everyone is above board.

[sckao]

 

How about NOT posting census data? That would fall under HELPING OTHER PEOPLE with the grading. Everyone needs to make their own way.

 

(thumbs u

 

 

[oakman29]

There is NO RULE that says you cannot use external data or that you can't compare it to other CGC slabs or do "research".

 

This contest is what you make of it. You don't have to compete with the others. You only have to compete with yourself.

 

And maybe some learning will take place and you will all end up better graders. (thumbs u

 

 

 

I thought I already was a good grader,guess not.

[DR.X]

Same goes for everyone. He's entitled to his opinion, the same as you, but it is not to approach a personal or individual level . Thank you.

 

But that takes the fun out of everything Doc.

 

DR.X

[DrWatson]

There is NO RULE that says you cannot use external data or that you can't compare it to other CGC slabs or do "research".

 

Perfect, then I will be posting CGC Census data for all books (in a separate thread) and evening the playing field for everyone.

 

Thanks for posting that Sacko, and that's really all I wanted to hear. I was under a different "gentleman's agreement" assumption about this contest, but no skin off my nose, as I'm killer with numbers and statistics.

Do not post the census data. If anyone wants to access the data, they can join the free portion of the Collector's Society and mine the information themselves.

[joe_collector]

How about NOT posting census data? That would fall under HELPING OTHER PEOPLE with the grading. Everyone needs to make their own way.

 

Exactly, and like Spoilers they can choose to read the thread or not.

 

Remember, this is exactly why Nik got CGC to withhold his books for one contest, as the hardcores are always looking for an edge, and since the data is freely available anyway, I don't see the harm in evening the playing field.

 

All this does is help people who were undecided between 6.0, 6.5 or 7.0 NOT pick a grade that doesn't even exist.

[Shark]

How about NOT posting census data? That would fall under HELPING OTHER PEOPLE with the grading. Everyone needs to make their own way.

 

(thumbs u

 

 

Yeah! I don't need anybody else's help getting all of these wrong. I can do that all by myself!

[sckao]

 

Well, no. Just like you can't discuss the grading aspects or the flaws in the current BOOK, you are not to provide "help" for other contestants.

 

 

 

 

[Mr.Diggler]

At least I don't cheat.

You're saying I did?

 

No, but a lot of those 7.0's are very suspicious, as they are the outliers compared to the standard grade given by the majority of respondents.

 

Whenever you see that, coupled with the fact that the7.0 grade is easily surmised from the Census data alone, it all makes you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I originally thought it to be a 6.0, rounded up for the CGC grade. I didn't cheat, .

[joe_collector]

At least I don't cheat.

You're saying I did?

 

No, but a lot of those 7.0's are very suspicious, as they are the outliers compared to the standard grade given by the majority of respondents.

 

Whenever you see that, coupled with the fact that the7.0 grade is easily surmised from the Census data alone, it all makes you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I originally thought it to be a 6.0, rounded up for the CGC grade. I didn't cheat, .

 

Ohhh Doc, Mr Tough Guy called me a *spoon* and made it all personal.

[DrWatson]

Ohhh Doc, Mr Tough Guy called me a *spoon* and made it all personal.

You asked for it.