How is this a 9.2?

[FlyingDonut]

The giveaway is the big "9.2" in the left hand corner.

[RockMyAmadeus]

In other words...buy the book, not the label. If YOU don't like the look of a particular book for the grade it's assigned (and the subsequent price, as well), don't buy it.

[This is water]

Gav I hate spine damage more than just about anything,and would probably prefer your 8.0 to this 9.2.

 

I agree with you Dave.

 

why don't y'all just call for grader notes.

 

Becuase we would rather speculate. Plus I usually ask for grader notes when trying to figure out why something got a lower then expected grade.

[joeypost]

It doesn't really look any better than this cracked out 8.0.

 

 

From what I can see this book has more general wear and a thumb crease on the open edge that looks like it tears at the top and bottom.

 

The 9.2 may be perfect except for the few spine breaks and the damage at the bottom of the book.

 

 

[Mark 1]

 

3. It could be a liberally graded 9.2. On another go around, it could get an 8.5. But the physical difference between a 9.2 and 8.5 is tiny. It's half a grade, within the subjectivity of grading. Different flaws have a different impact on the grade to different people, including CGC graders. What may be a big deal to some isn't to others.

 

.

 

Isn't half a grade in this case a 9.0? I think the difference of a 9.0 and 9.2 is tiny. A 8.5 to 9.2 is a bit more noticable....in my opinion.

 

 

[Boozad]

From what I can see this book has more general wear and a thumb crease on the open edge that looks like it tears at the top and bottom.

 

The 9.2 may be perfect except for the few spine breaks and the damage at the bottom of the book.

 

 

The slabbed copy is probably technically better than mine other than the bottom corner, I wouldn't argue that as I can't even see the other book properly. But for presentation I'll take the cracked out 8.0 and be more than happy, I'm comfortable dropping technical grades if the difference in presentation is minimal or invisible.

 

Anyway the 8.0 will present even better when I get off my arse and send it to you.

[oakman29]

 

3. It could be a liberally graded 9.2. On another go around, it could get an 8.5. But the physical difference between a 9.2 and 8.5 is tiny. It's half a grade, within the subjectivity of grading. Different flaws have a different impact on the grade to different people, including CGC graders. What may be a big deal to some isn't to others.

 

.

 

Isn't half a grade in this case a 9.0? I think the difference of a 9.0 and 9.2 is tiny. A 8.5 to 9.2 is a bit more noticable....in my opinion.

 

 

Who cares Mark! It's a great looking book,congrats.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

3. It could be a liberally graded 9.2. On another go around, it could get an 8.5. But the physical difference between a 9.2 and 8.5 is tiny. It's half a grade, within the subjectivity of grading. Different flaws have a different impact on the grade to different people, including CGC graders. What may be a big deal to some isn't to others.

 

.

 

Isn't half a grade in this case a 9.0? I think the difference of a 9.0 and 9.2 is tiny. A 8.5 to 9.2 is a bit more noticable....in my opinion.

 

 

No, half a grade is halfway between traditional grade nomenclature. A full grade would be VF to NM, or Fine to VG, or VG/F to F/VF. In this case, a NM- (9.2) is half a grade higher than an 8.5 (VF+)

 

Because of the way the 10 POINT system was designed (around the traditional nomenclature), if we lose the nomenclature, it will lose its internal logic.

 

"What's the difference between a 9.2 and 9.6?"

 

"Why, .4 of course!"

 

"What does .4 mean?"

 

"Um. One's a 9.2, and the other's a 9.6...?"

 

"Well, what's the difference between 5.0 and 6.0?"

 

"That's easy, 1.0!"

 

"But what, 1.8 to 2.5?"

 

".7!"

 

"Wait, so those are all completely different distinctions, right? .4, 1.0, .7?"

 

"Um. Sure, go with that."

 

If we KEEP standard nomenclature, the answer to all of those is a very simple "half a grade." NM- vs. NM+. VG/Fine vs. Fine. Good- vs. Good+.

 

Easy cheesy.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

3. It could be a liberally graded 9.2. On another go around, it could get an 8.5. But the physical difference between a 9.2 and 8.5 is tiny. It's half a grade, within the subjectivity of grading. Different flaws have a different impact on the grade to different people, including CGC graders. What may be a big deal to some isn't to others.

 

.

 

Isn't half a grade in this case a 9.0? I think the difference of a 9.0 and 9.2 is tiny. A 8.5 to 9.2 is a bit more noticable....in my opinion.

 

 

Who cares Mark!

 

People who spend thousands of dollars for those differences, likely.....

 

[october]

Sometimes CGC misses the boat. I just got an Adventure 300 back that I thought was an 8.5. 9.0 at best. They slabbed it at 9.4. A year ago, if someone had offered me $700 for it raw I would have jumped at the chance. Now? I just slab everything because every once in a while you get a nice grade you didn't expect....and that more than makes up for the occasional dud.

 

That's great for you...

 

However for the credibility of CGC and their longterm success...that is horrible.

 

CGC really needs to get QC and grading in check or the market will get another (real) competitor or all the CGC naysayers will eventually be right....slabs might become a thing of the past....

 

If you can't trust the grade then CGC services are worthless. My opinion of course.

 

Bear in mind, I am a CGC believer but when I see gift grades or undergrading...I have to shake my head in disgust.

 

 

That's one book out of 100+ I have subbed. Who is to say that my grade is the correct one? Maybe I got it wrong and CGC got it right. The point of my post wasn't that you can "slip one by the goalie" from time to time, it's that CGC's grading standards don't always match up with the standards of the person submitting the books. I am gradually getting the hang of it, but an outlier or two is hardly the cause for disgust that you make it out to be. I agree with CGC the lion's share of the time and that is more than I can say for any dealer (or collector) on the planet I have dealt with so far. I will take that level of accuracy any day and save my ire for elsewhere.

[Legion HQ]

have you seen the gift grades given to GL 76s?

 

Oh, reeeally...

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4911305#Post4911305

 

[Mr.Illmannered]

Forgive me for this....

 

:OHNOEZ::OHNOEZ::OHNOEZ:

 

There. Much better.

 

Couple of things to keep in mind:

 

1. It is impossible to accurately assess the condition of an item from a single picture of only the front cover.

 

2. The book could very easily (and likely is) otherwise flawless. Just as damage has a downward pull on the overall grade, so too does above average sharpness in other areas have an upward pull. That is why a book can be 9.8 with a color breaking spine stress...it's otherwise perfect.

 

3. It could be a liberally graded 9.2. On another go around, it could get an 8.5. But the physical difference between a 9.2 and 8.5 is tiny. It's half a grade, within the subjectivity of grading. Different flaws have a different impact on the grade to different people, including CGC graders. What may be a big deal to some isn't to others.

 

The difference in price is a function of a dumb market that insists on paying multiples for tiny differences in the level of physical preservation. The insane market that has developed over tiny differences has nothing to do with CGC. The point is, a liberally graded CGC 9.2 that is "really" an 8.0 or 8.5 (and that can't be known by a picture) is light years better than most raw "NM-" books, which would grade anywhere between a 2.0 and 7.5.

 

To suggest that it puts "CGC's credibility at risk" continues to betray a misunderstanding of just what it is that CGC does. The wild differences in price distort and magnify what otherwise are TINY differences. Everyone expects CGC to grade every single book exactly the same every single time, and that's just ridiculous. It was ridiculous in 2002, it was ridiculous in 2006, and it's ridiculous now. It's NOT what they do. It is the MARKET which has created this nonsense, not CGC.

 

Well put sir.

[seank]

Forgive me for this....

 

:OHNOEZ::OHNOEZ::OHNOEZ:

 

There. Much better.

 

Couple of things to keep in mind:

 

1. It is impossible to accurately assess the condition of an item from a single picture of only the front cover.

 

 

True, but the faults on this book are so glaring that they can be easily seen from the single picture of the front cover. I doubt any reputable seller here would list that book raw as a 9.2.

 

 

2. The book could very easily (and likely is) otherwise flawless. Just as damage has a downward pull on the overall grade, so too does above average sharpness in other areas have an upward pull. That is why a book can be 9.8 with a color breaking spine stress...it's otherwise perfect.

 

 

Also true, but to me, that lower left corner is fugly. I don't see how a corner bump that significant can be negated by the lack of other flaws. And that also doesn't include the spider creases. To me, there's not enough to drag that book from VF to NM-.

 

 

3. It could be a liberally graded 9.2. On another go around, it could get an 8.5. But the physical difference between a 9.2 and 8.5 is tiny. It's half a grade, within the subjectivity of grading. Different flaws have a different impact on the grade to different people, including CGC graders. What may be a big deal to some isn't to others.

 

 

I'd agree that the different between a 9.2 and a 9.4 is tiny and maybe that the difference betwen a 9.0 and a 9.2 is tiny, but the difference between an 8.5 and a 9.2 is big enough that grading noobs should be able to figure out which is which. 9.2 = almost perfect, 8.5 = almost perfect but with one or two not-insignificant defects. That corner bump is a not-insignificant defect.

 

I don't think that book was liberally graded. I think it was graded by someone wearing beer goggles while getting a lap-dance from a Tijuana whore. For the most part, CGC is pretty darn close (if not spot on) with grades. This one belongs with the infamous 2.5 Action 1.

 

[seank]

The giveaway is the big "9.2" in the left hand corner.

 

You are the wind beneath my wings.

[bane]

It doesn't really look any better than this cracked out 8.0.

 

 

There are days where I wished I hadn't sold that to you....

 

Now I can't find one!

[RockMyAmadeus]

I look at it, and as someone who is probably a fairly decent grader, I do not see the severity of problem (while looking at the same exact flaws) that you do.

 

As to point #1, please do not forget that pictures can ACCENTUATE flaws, too.

 

To each his own.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Also, please do not forget that "lack of flaws" is not the same thing as "superior condition." The average flawless book is different from a book with edges and corners so razor sharp, they can cut, and gloss so thick and undisturbed, it looks like it was printed yesterday. As well, richness of color impacts the eye appeal, and hence the grade.

 

These things all have bearing, and are not things that can be seen in a picture, for the most part.

[paperheart]

Did the book get graded the morning after someone got laid? Inquiring minds need to know.

 

graders don't get laid; so i'd rule that out

[the blob]

I've had someone complain about a vastly nicer looking book than that 9.2 that I have graded as a 9.0 (particularly irritating because the one flaw they were complaining about was clearly visible from the scan, so they wasted my money on postage insisting on a refund)

[the420kid]

maybe the book is mislabeled? seems to be the new fad