Does CGC not detract very much for spine tics? Or did this just get a generous grade? 1 1

[Venomous72]

I got this 181 a couple years ago, and I am happy that is it a 7.0 but it almost seems generous to me based on the spine tics.

Admittedly the rest of the book looks pretty good with no tears or anything, but I was wondering if spine tics detract less from a grade as opposed to, say, color breaking creases on corners and such?

[1950's war comics]

nobody know exactly what CGC grading standards are ... just as no one knows the secret recipe for KFC chicken... and neither of those two companies are going to reveal it publicly 

 

looks like a strong 7.0 to me ....

[Venomous72]

Just now, 1950's war comics said:

nobody know exactly what CGC grading standards are ... just as no one knows the secret recipe for KFC chicken... and neither of those two companies are going to reveal it publicly 

 

looks like a strong 7.0 to me ....

CGC holds all the power and all the secrets.  

[kav]

7.0's can have spine tics up the yin yang.

[ADAMANTIUM]

How About This "FOXY" lady  

[the blob]

I have a 7.0 strange tales 179 that I swear looks the same as a 9.4 marvel horror book from about the same year I just bought. 

[kav]

1 minute ago, the blob said:

I have a 7.0 strange tales 179 that I swear looks the same as a 9.4 marvel horror book from about the same year I just bought. 

[THE_BEYONDER]

13 minutes ago, kav said:

7.0's can have spine tics up the yin yang.

That’s a pretty big cluster, which includes the vertical crease at the staple. And there’s also damage on the right edge ...

[the blob]

2 minutes ago, kav said:

I think the 9.4 is ok though, I just don't understand the 7.0. It is a SS so I will leave it alone. Cgc would never bump it up to an 8.0 or 8.5 or whatever it should be, so not worth trying

[the blob]

Seems a bit rough on the spine for a 7.0, I agree. 

[kav]

3 minutes ago, THE_BEYONDER said:

That’s a pretty big cluster, which includes the vertical crease at the staple. And there’s also damage on the right edge ...

I mean, thats why it's not an 8.0, right?

[THE_BEYONDER]

 

2 minutes ago, the blob said:

I think the 9.4 is ok though, I just don't understand the 7.0. It is a SS so I will leave it alone. Cgc would never bump it up to an 8.0 or 8.5 or whatever it should be, so not worth trying

Why not get the graders notes?

Edited April 18, 2021 by THE_BEYONDER

[kav]

1 minute ago, THE_BEYONDER said:

 

Why not get the graders notes?

the grader's notes were 7.0s.

[Venomous72]

32 minutes ago, the blob said:

Seems a bit rough on the spine for a 7.0, I agree. 

I kinda thought so too but I’m not complaining I guess. The grader notes just list the spine tics, a very light stain on the back, and a ‘small color breaking creases bottom left front cover’. 
 

I think it displays well and the colors are great but yeah I guess they don’t take spine tics as seriously as some other defects 

[greggy]

35 minutes ago, kav said:

I mean, thats why it's not an 8.0, right?

That's what she said. 

[rjpb]

7.0 seems a tad generous, but not unreasonable. I'd have thought 6.0-6.5, but it's all just an estimate. 

[speedcake]

Seems ok to me. It's a FN/VF, it's going to have wear  

[chrisco37]

I’ve had better looking 7.0’s than that and I’ve had 8.0’s with just as many cb spine ticks.  As others have said, only CGC really knows.  
Agree that you probably wouldn’t get anything better than a 7.0 on a resub.  It’s a “soft 7.0”, IMO.  But it’s a 7.0.  I’d be happy with it.

[The Lions Den]

If I may offer a bit of insight into the secret society of CGC grading... 

A CGC 7.0 can have numerous small defects or even one large defect, but overall will maintain the appearance of a solid, above average copy. Since the front cover on this book displays the color breaking spine stress and other light wear, the rest of the book should be quite clean and relatively problem free. To put it in simple terms, it's better than a Fine but not nice enough to be a Very Fine.  

I sincerely hope this helps. It's an attractive looking copy...

[thehumantorch]

2 hours ago, James Lawry said:

I got this 181 a couple years ago, and I am happy that is it a 7.0 but it almost seems generous to me based on the spine tics.

Admittedly the rest of the book looks pretty good with no tears or anything, but I was wondering if spine tics detract less from a grade as opposed to, say, color breaking creases on corners and such?

I've had to adjust my grading after getting back a few books that were graded higher than I expected.  They were similar to this book in that they had numerous spine tics that I thought would push the books down in grade but the rest of the books, especially the right front cover, were very clean.  An FF12 I graded 5.0 that came back CGC 8.0 and I was shocked.  Granted Joey had pressed it and it improved but it had quite a few spine tics and vertical reading creases along the spine.  The right front edge was very clean and overall the rest of the book was nice.  I think when we grade books we tend to fixate on the spine tics or very noticeable defects and we don't give enough credit to the positives.