Silver Age CGC 9.9 and Reality

[joeypost]

I have sat here the last hour trying to infuse more "positive" into one of my books. I gave up and pressed out some "negatives".

[NewWorldOrder]

I have sat here the last hour trying to infuse more "positive" into one of my books. I gave up and pressed out some "negatives".

 

(thumbs u

[COI]

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

But John, if 9.6-9.8s are objective, how could a book that's supposed to score 9.6 get a 9.9?

 

 

 

[joeypost]

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

But John, if 9.6-9.8s are objective, how could a book that's supposed to score 9.6 get a 9.9?

 

 

 

SCS

[Timmay]

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

But John, if 9.6-9.8s are objective, how could a book that's supposed to score 9.6 get a 9.9?

 

 

 

Ask Greggy

[COI]

Also, if everything 9.8 and lower were truly objective, straight-up resubs would never work.

 

It's all subjective.

[DiceX]

Yes, I read that the first time.

 

What do you mean by "qualities"? Do you mean defects that are present?

 

Sure...either defects or the lack thereof. Positive or negative qualities.

 

 

So what would be a positive quality that exists on a 9.8, but not a 9.9?

 

I think you know what I mean but are trying to get more information. Unfortunately, this is where I have to run out for the kid's lessons and don't have time to get into it.

 

Basically, the more positive the quality of the book the higher the grade.

 

One person's positive quality may not be the same as everyone else's but we're talking about CGC's rules here.

 

 

9.9's and 10.0's are subjective

 

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

Almost all 9.9's or 10.0's I have seen could be re-graded lower, so it is what it is.

 

I just think sometimes a 9.8 looks so good to the modern graders (lets face it that is where the majority of 9.9/10.0's come from) that every once in a while a 9.9/10.0 is produced, especially with a Chromium or hard paper stock cover.

 

If that 9.9 Iron Man #1 was re-graded I would only come back a 9.6/9.8.

 

BTW my grades from CGC are just a good as from WW Chicago you long haired hippie.

 

To the OP question is CGC 9.9 a reality? Well of course CGC approves& issues that grade on the slab.

 

 

Wow. People with glass houses shouldn't throw rocks.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Also, if everything 9.8 and lower were truly objective, straight-up resubs would never work.

 

It's all subjective.

 

It's definitely subjective. And subjected.

 

Everything is subjected to microscopes and lasers. Frigging lasers.

 

And wooden wagon wheels.

 

 

[NewWorldOrder]

Yes, I read that the first time.

 

What do you mean by "qualities"? Do you mean defects that are present?

 

Sure...either defects or the lack thereof. Positive or negative qualities.

 

 

So what would be a positive quality that exists on a 9.8, but not a 9.9?

 

I think you know what I mean but are trying to get more information. Unfortunately, this is where I have to run out for the kid's lessons and don't have time to get into it.

 

Basically, the more positive the quality of the book the higher the grade.

 

One person's positive quality may not be the same as everyone else's but we're talking about CGC's rules here.

 

 

9.9's and 10.0's are subjective

 

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

Almost all 9.9's or 10.0's I have seen could be re-graded lower, so it is what it is.

 

I just think sometimes a 9.8 looks so good to the modern graders (lets face it that is where the majority of 9.9/10.0's come from) that every once in a while a 9.9/10.0 is produced, especially with a Chromium or hard paper stock cover.

 

If that 9.9 Iron Man #1 was re-graded I would only come back a 9.6/9.8.

 

BTW my grades from CGC are just a good as from WW Chicago you long haired hippie.

 

To the OP question is CGC 9.9 a reality? Well of course CGC approves& issues that grade on the slab.

 

 

Wow. People with glass houses shouldn't throw rocks.

 

 

What are you babbling about old man?

[NewWorldOrder]

9.9's and 10.0's are subjective

 

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

Almost all 9.9's or 10.0's I have seen could be re-graded lower, so it is what it is.

 

I just think sometimes a 9.8 looks so good to the modern graders (lets face it that is where the majority of 9.9/10.0's come from) that every once in a while a 9.9/10.0 is produced, especially with a Chromium or hard paper stock cover.

 

If that 9.9 Iron Man #1 was re-graded I would only come back a 9.6/9.8.

 

BTW my grades from CGC are just a good as from WW Chicago you long haired hippie.

 

To the OP question is CGC 9.9 a reality? Well of course CGC approves& issues that grade on the slab.

 

 

Technically even lower grades are subjective, but I fully agree with the point you were making.

 

Obviously every comic is different, but on average what percent of 9.9 regrades would you guess would come back as 9.8? To what percent of consistency would you guess the CGC graders could distinguish between a 9.9 and 10.0?

 

Well yea if you want to say like a 3.0 to a 3.5 or a 5.0 to a 5.5 is subjective I will totally agree.

 

I would say then all the .0's are are not subjective in my opinion or 9.2 on up.

 

For example 8.0 to 8.5 can be subjective but an 8.0 to 9.0 should not be.

 

There is a huge difference between a 9.4 to 9.6 and 9.6 to 9.8

[USArmyParatrooper]

9.9's and 10.0's are subjective

 

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

Almost all 9.9's or 10.0's I have seen could be re-graded lower, so it is what it is.

 

I just think sometimes a 9.8 looks so good to the modern graders (lets face it that is where the majority of 9.9/10.0's come from) that every once in a while a 9.9/10.0 is produced, especially with a Chromium or hard paper stock cover.

 

If that 9.9 Iron Man #1 was re-graded I would only come back a 9.6/9.8.

 

BTW my grades from CGC are just a good as from WW Chicago you long haired hippie.

 

To the OP question is CGC 9.9 a reality? Well of course CGC approves& issues that grade on the slab.

 

 

Technically even lower grades are subjective, but I fully agree with the point you were making.

 

Obviously every comic is different, but on average what percent of 9.9 regrades would you guess would come back as 9.8? To what percent of consistency would you guess the CGC graders could distinguish between a 9.9 and 10.0?

 

Well yea if you want to say like a 3.0 to a 3.5 or a 5.0 to a 5.5 is subjective I will totally agree.

 

I would say then all the .0's are are not subjective in my opinion or 9.2 on up.

 

For example 8.0 to 8.5 can be subjective but an 8.0 to 9.0 should not be.

 

There is a huge difference between a 9.4 to 9.6 and 9.6 to 9.8

 

ALL grades are subjective.

[NewWorldOrder]

9.9's and 10.0's are subjective

 

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

Almost all 9.9's or 10.0's I have seen could be re-graded lower, so it is what it is.

 

I just think sometimes a 9.8 looks so good to the modern graders (lets face it that is where the majority of 9.9/10.0's come from) that every once in a while a 9.9/10.0 is produced, especially with a Chromium or hard paper stock cover.

 

If that 9.9 Iron Man #1 was re-graded I would only come back a 9.6/9.8.

 

BTW my grades from CGC are just a good as from WW Chicago you long haired hippie.

 

To the OP question is CGC 9.9 a reality? Well of course CGC approves& issues that grade on the slab.

 

 

Technically even lower grades are subjective, but I fully agree with the point you were making.

 

Obviously every comic is different, but on average what percent of 9.9 regrades would you guess would come back as 9.8? To what percent of consistency would you guess the CGC graders could distinguish between a 9.9 and 10.0?

 

Well yea if you want to say like a 3.0 to a 3.5 or a 5.0 to a 5.5 is subjective I will totally agree.

 

I would say then all the .0's are are not subjective in my opinion or 9.2 on up.

 

For example 8.0 to 8.5 can be subjective but an 8.0 to 9.0 should not be.

 

There is a huge difference between a 9.4 to 9.6 and 9.6 to 9.8

 

ALL grades are subjective.

 

Nah, I can never fully agree with your blanket statement.

 

If someones can't objectively tell the difference between a 8.0 and 9.0 then they need more practice at grading. Plain and simple.

 

Ever wonder why some of us are never surprised with the grades we receive.

 

If all grading is subjective then what if I showed you an AF 15 that is missing a page, stains, tears, and a crease on it while I turn to you and tell you I grade this book NM.

 

Are you saying I am subjectivity calling it a NM book, or would you laugh in my face?

 

 

[mikenyc]

9.9's and 10.0's are subjective

 

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

Almost all 9.9's or 10.0's I have seen could be re-graded lower, so it is what it is.

 

I just think sometimes a 9.8 looks so good to the modern graders (lets face it that is where the majority of 9.9/10.0's come from) that every once in a while a 9.9/10.0 is produced, especially with a Chromium or hard paper stock cover.

 

If that 9.9 Iron Man #1 was re-graded I would only come back a 9.6/9.8.

 

BTW my grades from CGC are just a good as from WW Chicago you long haired hippie.

 

To the OP question is CGC 9.9 a reality? Well of course CGC approves& issues that grade on the slab.

 

 

Technically even lower grades are subjective, but I fully agree with the point you were making.

 

Obviously every comic is different, but on average what percent of 9.9 regrades would you guess would come back as 9.8? To what percent of consistency would you guess the CGC graders could distinguish between a 9.9 and 10.0?

 

Well yea if you want to say like a 3.0 to a 3.5 or a 5.0 to a 5.5 is subjective I will totally agree.

 

I would say then all the .0's are are not subjective in my opinion or 9.2 on up.

 

For example 8.0 to 8.5 can be subjective but an 8.0 to 9.0 should not be.

 

There is a huge difference between a 9.4 to 9.6 and 9.6 to 9.8

 

ALL grades are subjective.

 

Nah, I can never fully agree with your blanket statement.

 

If someones can't objectively tell the difference between a 8.0 and 9.0 then they need more practice at grading. Plain and simple.

 

Ever wonder why some of us are never surprised with the grades we receive.

 

If all grading is subjective then what if I showed you an AF 15 that is missing a page, stains, tears, and a crease on it while I turn to you and tell you I grade this book NM.

 

Are you saying I am subjectivity calling it a NM book, or would you laugh in my face?

 

 

"If there's no such thing as objective reality, why can't we just imagine we don't have to pay the rent."

[bluechip]

9.9's and 10.0's are subjective

 

0.5-.98's are objective

 

I just looked at an Spider-man #1 CGC 9.9 (TMc) and in the first 2 seconds of seeing the book I saw it an obvious reason why it should have been graded a 9.6, or a generous 9.8 at best.

 

Almost all 9.9's or 10.0's I have seen could be re-graded lower, so it is what it is.

 

I just think sometimes a 9.8 looks so good to the modern graders (lets face it that is where the majority of 9.9/10.0's come from) that every once in a while a 9.9/10.0 is produced, especially with a Chromium or hard paper stock cover.

 

If that 9.9 Iron Man #1 was re-graded I would only come back a 9.6/9.8.

 

BTW my grades from CGC are just a good as from WW Chicago you long haired hippie.

 

To the OP question is CGC 9.9 a reality? Well of course CGC approves& issues that grade on the slab.

 

 

Technically even lower grades are subjective, but I fully agree with the point you were making.

 

Obviously every comic is different, but on average what percent of 9.9 regrades would you guess would come back as 9.8? To what percent of consistency would you guess the CGC graders could distinguish between a 9.9 and 10.0?

 

Well yea if you want to say like a 3.0 to a 3.5 or a 5.0 to a 5.5 is subjective I will totally agree.

 

I would say then all the .0's are are not subjective in my opinion or 9.2 on up.

 

For example 8.0 to 8.5 can be subjective but an 8.0 to 9.0 should not be.

 

There is a huge difference between a 9.4 to 9.6 and 9.6 to 9.8

 

ALL grades are subjective.

 

Nah, I can never fully agree with your blanket statement.

 

If someones can't objectively tell the difference between a 8.0 and 9.0 then they need more practice at grading. Plain and simple.

 

Ever wonder why some of us are never surprised with the grades we receive.

 

If all grading is subjective then what if I showed you an AF 15 that is missing a page, stains, tears, and a crease on it while I turn to you and tell you I grade this book NM.

 

Are you saying I am subjectivity calling it a NM book, or would you laugh in my face?

 

 

"If there's no such thing as objective reality, why can't we just imagine we don't have to pay the rent."

 

Objective reality dictates that if you take something made of paper and put it in a container thatis not perfectly flat and allows it to slide into the edges, that paper-based product may be near perfect when it goes in but may cease to be so, afterward.

 

[WEBHEAD]

Just check out Robojo... seems like he has the market on 9.9 books

[batman_fan]

The proper way to identify 9.9 is to lick the spine. A 9.9 has a distinctively different taste than a 9.8 or lower grade book. 9.9s have a more fruity taste with a hint of vanilla.

[valiantman]

If you look at the universal chart results something stands out - the average grade results; it actually gives you that sliding scale that moves based on decade.

 

2000 up - 9.78 & 9.71 average HG threshold 9.8

1990-1999 - 9.61 average HG threshold 9.6

1980-1989 - 9.41 average HG threshold 9.4

1970-1979 - 8.93 average HG threshold 9.0

1960-1969 - 7.73 average HG threshold 7.5 or 8.0

1950-1959 - 7.20 average HG threshold 7.0

1940-1949 - 6.76 average HG threshold 6.5 or 7.0

1930-1939 - 5.52 average HG threshold 5.5

 

Just throwing it out there, thought the numbers were interesting. I know these are average grades for submissions but presumably people are submitting their better books so using the submitted average as the threshold makes sense.

 

 

Yep. (thumbs u

[USArmyParatrooper]

The proper way to identify 9.9 is to lick the spine. A 9.9 has a distinctively different taste than a 9.8 or lower grade book. 9.9s have a more fruity taste with a hint of vanilla.

 

Do you lick a lot of spines?