Is CGC still Grading tougher than Overstreet does ?

[Peter_Parker59]

Hi to you fellow collectors,

 

As emphasized by Chuck Rozansky in his 'tales from the data base', CGC has a reputation of grading way tougher than Overstreet (from their grading guide).

 

Now, I'd like to know if the latest Overstreet grading guide has made these 2 gradings even.

 

What do you think ?

[blowout]

I don't think that CGC have ever graded 'tougher' than Overstreet.

The two systems just add more/less weight to different criteria when establishing the grade.

 

For example:

Overstreet grades much tougher when it comes to printing defects (eg mis-wraps, mis-cuts, ofcentering etc) and page quality (white, off-white etc).

CGC grades much tougher on corners (sharp/rounded) and marks/stains.

 

Overall when you factor all these differences (and more) in to the grade I think both Overstreet and CGC come out about even.

 

[Peter_Parker59]

Thanks for your input.

 

Is this opinion based on your personal experience, or on your reading the overstreet grading guide ?

 

Maybe the difference between CGC and Overstreet grading appears when it comes to really high grades (>9.0)...

 

[thecomicsheet]

I'm one of those who believe that CGC grades are much tougher than the 'old' Overstreet guidelines. The 'new' grading guide standards I think bring the standards closer together, but in general I think CGC will assign a lower grade than you would expect by the Overstreet standards.

 

I think a large part of this comes from the natural bias of collectors and dealers to only send in to CGC the best books they have. After all, it costs a lot of money to get a book graded - you don't want to get stuck with a low grade worthless piece of junk. This leaves CGC with a lot of books that are skewed very heavily to high quality books. They don't want to assign every book coming in a 9.8, so they begin looking for the least little excuse to assign lower grades to books. There is nothing nefarious going on here, it is just a natural result of trying to differentiate between a lot of high grade books.

 

I think the 'middle grades' are the hardest for any dealer (and CGC) to get consistent. Low grades (0.5 to 4.0) are actually pretty easy. The books look ratty and well used. High grades are next hardest 9.4, 9.6, and 9.8 (9.9 and 10.0 are simply a crapshoot). But if you use CGC standards it is not hard to make the first cut of 9.4 and above - 9.4 books and above look basically perfect. You've got to pull out the magnifying glass and look VERY close to differentiate 9.4, 9.6, and 9.8. If you line up several examples of each grade, you CAN do it. I believe on average a CGC 9.6 books look better than 9.4 and 9.8 books look better than 9.6 - but you have to look very close and look at a lot of examples.

 

The mid-grades (4.5 to 9.2) are where a LOT of controversy comes in. Just look at the thread on the upgrade of that Nicolas Cage book to a 9.2. And look at some of the other threads on 'what is the grade of this book'. I participated in one such current discussion and the grading opinions ran from 5.5 to 8.5. That is quite a range, and most of those opinions came from experienced dealers/collectors!

 

I thank that ANY dealer selling raw books (and that includes C.R. at Mile High) is going to upset some customers. Grading books is a very subjective process. I will buy from a dealer (including Mile High) who offers a good return policy. If, in my opinion, the dealer consistently overgrades (by my standards), I simply automatically lower the dealers grade when cruising their catalog and act accordingly.

 

I also have considerable sympathy for those dealers who offer a liberal return policy. Suppose a customer buys 100 books and winds up returning half of them. The customer then has the opportunity to cherry pick the selection. Of COURSE they are not going to complain about and return the books you UNDERGRADED (in their opinion). But they are quick to complain about and return the books you OVERGRADED (in their opinion). No dealer can hope to get the grade spot on with every single book in their inventory. The best ones can only hope that ON AVERAGE they get it about right and that they don't ever miss really bad on a single book.

 

[fantastic_four]

I participated in one such current discussion and the grading opinions ran from 5.5 to 8.5. That is quite a range, and most of those opinions came from experienced dealers/collectors!

I wouldn't take the "guess the grade" threads on here as a representative sample of the variance in grading amongst dealers/hardcore collectors...it's like 3-4 times harder to grade a scan than it is a book in person. I can see dents and creases in seconds when looking at a book at an angle under a bright light, but it takes me a bit to find them in a scan and I often miss defects there.

 

CGC redefined the 8.0 and above grades to a level of tightness that only a handful of collectors/dealers comprehended before CGC set their standard for what a NM or MT comic is.

[thecomicsheet]

I absolutely agree that grading based of a scan is difficult. Scans don't pick up the level of surface gloss very well. You can't tell 'suppleness' from a scan, or even if the book has a serious 'warp' in it. Lines and creases are often hidden by the angle of the light. I wouldn't trust a grade assigned purely by looking at scans.

 

Still some variance between graders is to be expected. Even CGC recognizes this by having 3 graders look at each book. I would be interested in hearing from CGC on this. Do they simply take the average of the three? Or does the senior grader (S. Borock?) look at the opinions and pick the final grade himself. I'd like to know the standard deviation in grades assigned by the 3 graders. This is important quality control information that I would gather if I was CGC.

 

[Peter_Parker59]

I'm happy to see that most collectors here agree with me on CGC grading tougher than anyone else.

 

The problem I see with CGC becoming more and more a standard in the hobby is that when a book get slabbed, it won't be open before long.

It sure would be foolish to set a 9.4 book free of its holder to read it.

 

But on the other hand, I think a great pleasure comes with reading those comics, or at least with browsing through the pages.

Unlike any other grading standard, CGC prevents you from having access to your comics (except for the front and back cover).

Of course, you can get a reader's copy in Fair condition, but do you get the same thrill when reading it as the one you get when reading your 9.4 copy (which is just like it was just off the press, 30 or 40 years ago) ?

 

This is definitely food for thought, IMO.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Or does the senior grader (S. Borock?) look at the opinions and pick the final grade himself.

Final grader makes the final call; Steve said this in an interview I read somewhere. I think Borock and Haspel are the final graders, but there might be one other one (Litch?).

[JLA_ALL_THE_WAY]

Steve told me last week that he grades the book after the first two; THEN looks at the other grades and finalizes the #...unless there is a noticeable discrepancy.

 

THEN IT'S [!@#%^&^]-WHOOPIN' TIME!!

 

Rick

[fantastic_four]

Yep, all three graders come up with their grade independently is what they said in the interview. The only thing they see from each other prior to coming up with their grade is the pre-grader's notes about major defects. I'm pretty sure Borock doesn't see EVERY book, that Haspel is the final grader on many and I bet Litch sometimes is as well, maybe when one of the others is on vacation.

 

One thing I wonder is if they can see Friesan's restoration notes, or do they each do their own restoration check?