2022 CGC Grading Contest Season 1 Spring Edition (#2) Round 4 13 13

[zzutak]

On 5/12/2022 at 11:56 AM, apoptosis said:

Does anyone know what happened?

The player scores in Column 1 of the worksheet did not update from Round 3 to Round 4.  This is only a guess, but I suspect CGC re-used the spreadsheet from Grading Contest #1 (which only had 3 rounds and 15 books for most contestants).  It's likely that Column 1 was not re-coded to include the final five books (Books #16-20) in each player's total.  It'll be a very simple fix for whoever coded the worksheet. 

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

Probably referring to that screenshot that I altered the hue, darkness, saturation, etc to make that corner stand out. 

If so they are referring to Photo Enhancing Devices.  

In which I can say that I was not. I may have done better if i did. I am so close to the bottom I probably should have.. 

[CJ Design]

On 5/12/2022 at 2:04 PM, apoptosis said:

Ummm, I will bite what is a PED?   Is it short for pedigree?  If so how would one use it, and why is that a problem?

Maybe something like this...

 

 

[CGC Mike]

Here's the results.  

 

[CGC Mike]

In case it was missed, this round is for @Mr. Zipper and @Superman2006 only to determine 2nd and 3rd place winners.  

 

 

[Pantodude]

There's hope for me yet!  I got a bullseye (Strange Tales)!   To keep my prior round's bullseye company.    Congrats to @jbpez for winning and the other podium dwellers (exact order yet to be determined)!   

Edited May 12, 2022 by Pantodude

[ttfitz]

On 5/12/2022 at 11:29 AM, Hudson said:

Again, I may be in the minority here with my politically incorrect view regarding people taking responsibility for things, but I guess I will just have to live with that; old fashion as I am. 

That view is not at all "politically incorrect."

[Engr62]

On 5/11/2022 at 8:53 PM, kav said:

mike what about next time a $100 prize for anyone gets 5 bullseyes?  I mean that is so freakin rare it should be rewarded regardless of total score.

I think 4 bullseyes sounds better for a $100 prize. 

[ttfitz]

On 5/12/2022 at 1:01 PM, Comicshows said:

My biggest swing and a miss was the strange tales. Don’t think it is my imagination but saw all sorts of little things with it along with the bottom staple which others mentioned. I put it at a 7.0. 

You should be thanking me for keeping you from the embarrassment of giving the furthest off grade (I sit all alone on the chart at 6.0)

[zzutak]

On 5/11/2022 at 5:53 PM, kav said:

mike what about next time a $100 prize for anyone gets 5 bullseyes?  I mean that is so freakin rare it should be rewarded regardless of total score.

Kav, you may actually be on to something here.    I haven't checked the results tables, but I don't believe anyone has yet had a perfect 5-bullseye round (which makes it unheard of, not just rare).  However, the currency of these contests is points rather than cash, so the more appropriate reward for a 5-bullseye round would be a -1 or -2 point bonus.  A scoring twist of this type would certainly keep more players in contention for more rounds.  And it could definitely effect a player's willingness to "gamble" on a particular guess, rather than play it safe.

Here's an example.  I'm nearly positive CGC's grade on a specific specimen will be between 4.0 and 5.0.  My gut instinct favors 4.0.  Do I swing for the fences and guess 4.0 (possibly leading to penalty of 2), or do I go the safe route and choose 4.5 (thereby limiting my maximum penalty to 1). 

I'm not advocating for a scoring change.  I'm just suggesting a way to add a bit of cayenne (or kav-enne) to the recipe without increasing CGC's bottom-line cost.