2015 Green Eggs Grading Contest- Round 4

[IncredibleHauck]

I should have went with my gut. I called .5 and 9.8 but played it safe and shot myself in the foot.

[Azkaban]

Maybe I was the only person who bothered to look up the Wings book in the census. There is one listing for the canadian edition of #3

 

 

 

 

 

[thunsicker]

I had 1.5 and 9.8

Looked at several 1.5s that were way worse with chewed away covers/pages.

 

The key is CGC new stance on tape - they grade the book as if the tape was not present, which would make the Wings coverless.

 

Nope - there are many 1.0s with completely split covers. See this one for example: http://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/detective-comics-31-dc-1939-cgc-fr-10-white-pages/a/7099-91119.s

 

It was the extra missing pieces that made the difference.

 

+1. I thought there was too much missing for it to squeak into a 1.0. Though I thought it was close.

[joe_collector]

Nope - there are many 1.0s with completely split covers. See this one for example:

 

If that was graded after the policy change, and the spine split is complete from top to bottom, then the book is a mistake. Coverless gets a 0.5.

 

It's not coverless. It has a cover that's split.

 

Once again, for those who don't read, CGC current stance is to grade books with tape holding pieces or covers on as NOT having tape at all.

[joe_collector]

Maybe I was the only person who bothered to look up the Wings book in the census. There is one listing for the canadian edition of #3

 

Probably a lot of the bull's eye did this too, but it's still cheating.

 

[thirdgreenham]

Nope - there are many 1.0s with completely split covers. See this one for example:

 

If that was graded after the policy change, and the spine split is complete from top to bottom, then the book is a mistake. Coverless gets a 0.5.

 

It's not coverless. It has a cover that's split.

 

Once again, for those who don't read, CGC current stance is to grade books with tape holding pieces or covers on as NOT having tape at all.

 

Correct. So, that Wings book is the inside + a split & detached front cover + a split & detached back cover. In other words, a 0.5 (thumbs u

[01TheDude]

Maybe I was the only person who bothered to look up the Wings book in the census. There is one listing for the canadian edition of #3

 

that's not grading !!

 

who said I looked at it before I submitted my grade?

 

the fact remains-- there is one book on the entire census that matches -- it happens to bet he same grade I gave it, .5

 

I could not talk about that after noticing it. I can now.

 

[01TheDude]

Maybe I was the only person who bothered to look up the Wings book in the census. There is one listing for the canadian edition of #3

 

Probably a lot of the bull's eye did this too, but it's still cheating.

 

 

BS -- I looked it up well after I submitted my grade

[rjpb]

I thought the Wings was pretty obvious, textbook example of a poor but "complete" book. I thought the Spider-man could be either a 9.6 or a 9.8 and went with the odds, figuring 9.8 is the most common grade.

[Hado]

Look beside the upside down Spidey in the top left, is that not a spine tick in the P of Marvel Ent. Group?

 

Ah well, positive points is good points.

[joe_collector]

I looked it up well after I submitted my grade

 

A similar thing happened to me in another grading contest - while researching CGC grading, the exact book came up in a Google search. I kept my original grade (which was 1 or 0.5 away), notified the organizer and left it at that.

 

Then again, that book had an extraordinarily high number of bulls eyes, so there are definitely people out there willing to do anything to get the edge.

[oakman29]

I looked it up well after I submitted my grade

 

A similar thing happened to me in another grading contest - while researching CGC grading, the exact book came up in a Google search. I kept my original grade (which was 1 or 0.5 away), notified the organizer and left it at that.

 

Then again, that book had an extraordinarily high number of bulls eyes, so there are definitely people out there willing to do anything to get the edge.

 

That's a shame,because this is supposed to be a fun game.

[joe_collector]

That's a shame,because this is supposed to be a fun game.

 

Fun? Don't you remember Nik's grading contests where he'd get angry at people data mining the Census looking for subs on his account within a certain date range? One time, it was like bulls eye after bulls eye after bulls eye, even on trick books - grades way off the median. Lots of gaming of the system has gone on in the past.

 

Things got pretty ugly in some contests, with some organizers going so far as to getting others to submit their books over a longer period of time.

[01TheDude]

What is a shame is that you immediately believe that I am somehow cheating this game simply because I noticed something about the book itself. I submitted my grade and as I have been doing on some books I have never seen before, I went to eBay to see what books like this were selling for. When I didn't find any that were graded and only one other for sale, I wondered how rare it was and checked the census-- where I found only one entry for this particular issue.

 

 

 

[427Impaler]

I was torn between 1.0 and 0.5 on the Wings. It was the condition of the back cover and the additional paper loss that settled me on the 0.5.

 

 

[joe_collector]

What is a shame is that you immediately believe that I am somehow cheating this game simply because I noticed something about the book itself

 

Huh? Did you not read my posts?

 

I gave you the benefit of the doubt, as I had been in a similar situation. I'm just stating that if the information is out there, then past behavior states that *other people* were cheating.

 

It's just the nature of the beast when it comes to these things.

[drewincanada]

I've skipped the grading contests for the past few years, but in the past I recall that the books used in the contest had been slabbed too recently to be included in the census. I just assumed that it would still be the case.

[01TheDude]

I've skipped the grading contests for the past few years, but in the past I recall that the books used in the contest had been slabbed too recently to be included in the census. I just assumed that it would still be the case.

 

I did not assume that the Wings book was the one in the census -- just found it odd that there was only one in there. Perhaps that is more common than I know. I don't dig around the census too often.

[01TheDude]

What is a shame is that you immediately believe that I am somehow cheating this game simply because I noticed something about the book itself

 

Huh? Did you not read my posts?

 

I gave you the benefit of the doubt, as I had been in a similar situation. I'm just stating that if the information is out there, then past behavior states that *other people* were cheating.

 

It's just the nature of the beast when it comes to these things.

 

I was actually directing that at Oakman's reply to you. But I am glad to hear you were speaking in generalities. I have to wonder how often in any of these contests there was single entry on the census for a book set up to be graded.

[Senormac]

Does anyone foresee a 2 part grading contest where all 10 or 20 books are graded by us....raw.... before they are sent to CGC.....then, after they are done.... the whole reveal could be done in one weekend