Ive lost ALL confidence in CGC - UPDATE on page 221 2 2

[madnstuff-migration]

Edited April 29, 2014 by madnstuff

[VintageComics]

If someone's family member unattractive to you, pointing it out while viewing someone's family pics might be honest but still in bad taste.

 

Sometimes discretion and manners is more valuable than just being blatantly 'honest' when nobody asked for it.

 

 

[trmoore54]

Yes, it's "better than nothing"...what an endorsement, eh?

 

Actually, it's the "better than everything else" endorsement. It's not a perfect system but I have yet to find a better one unless I put in the work, take my losses and learn how to grade myself (or until I find those dealers who tend to undergrade).

 

 

No, the majority of books in the hobby will gradually skew towards the over-graded. The tightly graded books will get resubbed, and resubbed, and resubbed, until they achieve the 'desired' grade, not the 'correct' one.

 

The already over-graded books will remain in the same slab forever and a day.

 

There are posters in this very thread that resub and resub - a process punctuated by numerous phonecalls and 'chats' - until they get the grade they want.

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

 

People don't call and chat until they get the grade they want. That's a fabrication on your part.

 

My own personal frustration stems from inconsistency, which nobody in this thread will argue hasn't existed.

 

And while 'the majority of books in the hobby gradually skew towards over-graded' (also an exaggeration - at least namisgr qualified his as such) nothing happens in a vacuum except for internet disagreements. People will continue to get more educated about graded books (just as they have been from 1999 until now) and markets will continue to evolve, pay premiums for tightly graded books and avoid over graded books.

 

While every system has it's flaws, you are focusing on all the negatives while turning a blind eye to the positives. Throwing out baby and bathwater.

 

You meant to say hasn't...

[VintageComics]

Yes.

[namisgr]

While this is obviously a big exaggeration, there are an awful lot of slabbed comics with undeserving grades, and an evergrowing number of them.

Yep, and it's not only because of CGC's systematically loosening grading standards either. Over time, the normalized distribution of over/undergraded books gets skewed as the undergraded books are disproportionately resubbed while the overgraded books never get the "opportunity" to be given the correct grade.

 

Absolutely, and it's what I meant by referring to it as the Peter Principle of comics:

 

It is named after Laurence J. Peter who co-authored the humorous 1969 book The Peter Principle: Why Things Always Go Wrong with Raymond Hull. The authors suggest that people will tend to be promoted until they reach their "position of incompetence".

[MrBedrock]

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

Then why did it get it?

[namisgr]

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

Then why did it get it?

 

One circumstance is when the same comic is graded four times, and one of those times the planetary alignment and mood of the graders led to a higher grade than was assigned the other three.

 

Kind of like how the JIM 83 in question went from a 6.0 to a 7.0 and then back again to something else. Had the 7.0 version not also been deemed to have been trimmed, the comic would have never been taken out of its 7.0 holder for regrading for the rest of its natural life. It would have been maximized.

[MrBedrock]

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

Then why did it get it?

 

One circumstance is when the same comic is graded four times, and one of those times the planetary alignment and mood of the graders led to a higher grade than was assigned the other three.

But that one time resulted in a grade that was in the realm of possibility the other three times, not some implausible grade totally arrived at arbitrarily.

[namisgr]

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

Then why did it get it?

 

One circumstance is when the same comic is graded four times, and one of those times the planetary alignment and mood of the graders led to a higher grade than was assigned the other three.

But that one time resulted in a grade that was in the realm of possibility the other three times, not some implausible grade totally arrived at arbitrarily.

 

The higher grade may not be arbitrary, but it's at the very edge of the bell-shaped curve, so to speak.

 

Take a hypothetical mid-grade comic being graded 20 times.

 

3 times, it would receive a 6.0

14 times, it would grade 6.5

3 times it would receive a 7.0, and never be resubmitted again.

 

[MrBedrock]

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

Then why did it get it?

 

One circumstance is when the same comic is graded four times, and one of those times the planetary alignment and mood of the graders led to a higher grade than was assigned the other three.

But that one time resulted in a grade that was in the realm of possibility the other three times, not some implausible grade totally arrived at arbitrarily.

 

The higher grade may not be arbitrary, but it's at the very edge of the bell-shaped curve, so to speak.

Not if it were arrived at on the first submission. Maybe it was the right grade all along.

[namisgr]

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

Then why did it get it?

 

One circumstance is when the same comic is graded four times, and one of those times the planetary alignment and mood of the graders led to a higher grade than was assigned the other three.

But that one time resulted in a grade that was in the realm of possibility the other three times, not some implausible grade totally arrived at arbitrarily.

 

The higher grade may not be arbitrary, but it's at the very edge of the bell-shaped curve, so to speak.

Not if it were arrived at on the first submission. Maybe it was the right grade all along.

 

Once a comic reaches its maximal grade, it won't be re-graded again. That could happen after the first, second, third, or nth time the comic was graded. After enough comics have been resubmitted enough times to achieve their maximal grades, the slabbed population is skewed to a much higher average grade than obtained after only a single grading of each. Hence, the Peter Principle of comics grading.

 

This scenario is aided and abetted by periods of loose grading, where a significant number of books reach the highest grades they could ever possibly obtain, and are removed from the cycle of resubmission.

[DrWatson]

Two Wongs can't make a Wright.

 

[MrBedrock]

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

Then why did it get it?

 

One circumstance is when the same comic is graded four times, and one of those times the planetary alignment and mood of the graders led to a higher grade than was assigned the other three.

But that one time resulted in a grade that was in the realm of possibility the other three times, not some implausible grade totally arrived at arbitrarily.

 

The higher grade may not be arbitrary, but it's at the very edge of the bell-shaped curve, so to speak.

Not if it were arrived at on the first submission. Maybe it was the right grade all along.

 

Once a comic reaches its maximal grade, it won't be re-graded again. That could happen after the first, second, third, or nth time the comic was graded.

I would trade the word true for maximal, because aren't we essentially talking about giving a book it's truest grade within a grade range. We may be disappointed that the grading system pushes toward the top of a grade range instead of the bottom or middle, but that is exactly what we all knew would happen when the system was introduced. It is the natural progression. So within this system any book graded at the top of a grade range is probably most correctly graded. Any book obviously graded outside of a grade range is mis-graded. I tend to think that what some folks are calling mis-grades are really grades at the top of a grade range. I've certainly seen some books where the graders totally air-balled it. But those instances are very rare in the grand scheme of things.

[rjpb]

There is no grade, only the grader.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I have been finding plenty of old label books (I seek these out) from 1970-2000 that are overgraded. One example does not a pattern make, nor two, nor a hundred, true...but they DO exist.

 

I just picked up a 9.6 X-Men #113...has a 1/4" light color breaking crease in the bottom right corner, along with some NCB chatter along the top edge...it was graded 3/10/2003. This is a book I wouldn't grade higher than 9.2, specifically because of the CB crease.

 

I can't speak to Gold or Silver; I don't deal with those. But for 1970-up, I just don't see the tightness of the early years.

[trmoore54]

I like how Metropolis used .25s and .75s...

[VintageComics]

I would trade the word true for maximal, because aren't we essentially talking about giving a book it's truest grade within a grade range. We may be disappointed that the grading system pushes toward the top of a grade range instead of the bottom or middle, but that is exactly what we all knew would happen when the system was introduced. It is the natural progression. So within this system any book graded at the top of a grade range is probably most correctly graded. Any book obviously graded outside of a grade range is mis-graded. I tend to think that what some folks are calling mis-grades are really grades at the top of a grade range. I've certainly seen some books where the graders totally air-balled it. But those instances are very rare in the grand scheme of things.

 

Did you guys ever argue whether a book was a Good or a Fine back in the day?

[trmoore54]

I would trade the word true for maximal, because aren't we essentially talking about giving a book it's truest grade within a grade range. We may be disappointed that the grading system pushes toward the top of a grade range instead of the bottom or middle, but that is exactly what we all knew would happen when the system was introduced. It is the natural progression. So within this system any book graded at the top of a grade range is probably most correctly graded. Any book obviously graded outside of a grade range is mis-graded. I tend to think that what some folks are calling mis-grades are really grades at the top of a grade range. I've certainly seen some books where the graders totally air-balled it. But those instances are very rare in the grand scheme of things.

 

Did you guys ever argue whether a book was a Good or a Fine back in the day?

 

All my FNs were NM!

[drbanner]

I have been finding plenty of old label books (I seek these out) from 1970-2000 that are overgraded. One example does not a pattern make, nor two, nor a hundred, true...but they DO exist.

 

I just picked up a 9.6 X-Men #113...has a 1/4" light color breaking crease in the bottom right corner, along with some NCB chatter along the top edge...it was graded 3/10/2003. This is a book I wouldn't grade higher than 9.2, specifically because of the CB crease.

 

I can't speak to Gold or Silver; I don't deal with those. But for 1970-up, I just don't see the tightness of the early years.

Of course you don't see them, that's the whole point of the Peter Principle of Comics. Tightly graded books have a propensity for being resubbed (with or without additional manipulations), whereas 9.6 books with 1/4" creases remain in stasis. Who's going to resub that X-men 113? No one, that's who. (thumbs u

[revat]

 

And I'll pretty much guarantee you, that is unlikely to be the grade the book warrants.

Then why did it get it?

 

One circumstance is when the same comic is graded four times, and one of those times the planetary alignment and mood of the graders led to a higher grade than was assigned the other three.

But that one time resulted in a grade that was in the realm of possibility the other three times, not some implausible grade totally arrived at arbitrarily.

 

The higher grade may not be arbitrary, but it's at the very edge of the bell-shaped curve, so to speak.

Not if it were arrived at on the first submission. Maybe it was the right grade all along.

 

I'm not sure this is true, as the submitter probably doesn't have an accurate picture of a bellcurve. Certainly if they KNEW the peak grade was achieved they wouldn't resubmit, but I'm sure there are people who see CGC 9.6's with perfect covers and resubmit over and over never seeing the crease on one of the inside pages. People don't always (some would say rarely) know what the peak grade is.

 

Once a comic reaches its maximal grade, it won't be re-graded again. That could happen after the first, second, third, or nth time the comic was graded. After enough comics have been resubmitted enough times to achieve their maximal grades, the slabbed population is skewed to a much higher average grade than obtained after only a single grading of each. Hence, the Peter Principle of comics grading.

 

This scenario is aided and abetted by periods of loose grading, where a significant number of books reach the highest grades they could ever possibly obtain, and are removed from the cycle of resubmission.