Four Scores and 1.5 years Ago...(Registry Scoring Discussion Thread)
5 5

118 posts in this topic

On 10/31/2022 at 4:28 PM, wytshus said:

Keys and vintage comics were scored according to Overstreet 9.2.

My vote would be to continue this approach. Basing modern comics on the prevailing cover price makes sense to me, but I can’t see modern and vintage comics treated the same.

 

On 10/31/2022 at 4:28 PM, wytshus said:

The main problem is that prices for keys do not stay static.  Also, we are talking about open market prices, something that CGC shouldn't be involved in..

 

On 10/31/2022 at 4:28 PM, wytshus said:

Currently, there is simply too much volatility and FOMO hysteria to continually update individual scores every time there's a spike, it's not worth the time, and it raises a lot of questions about impartiality.

I’m in complete agreement with your observations on volitility and FOMO, and personally I don’t expect CGC to chase prices up for a few months before the next Disney+ streaming show only to chase them back down again after.

(I have a vision of wytshus standing in front of an old-fashioned stock ticker, reading the tape and yelling out “Young Avengers 6 UP 0.875!” She-Hulk 1 DOWN 0.125!”)

Maybe it’s just setting expectations that CGC registry points are more of a 12-month trailing indicator than a “last sale” affair. Maybe your update cycle should be more Overstreet and less GPA. Maybe that takes a little oxygen away from all the FOMO right now. Also, I don’t want to constantly chase my registry points up and down on the latest rumors from self-serving YouTube speculators.

What if you guys licensed Overstreet’s data for the sole purpose of calculating registry points with your algorithm? Somebody doesn’t like the points for a book? Take it up with Overstreet.

Your labor savings would probably cover the licensing cost (especially if you only need the 9.2 data).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
On 10/31/2022 at 7:57 PM, Off Panel said:

What if you guys licensed Overstreet’s data for the sole purpose of calculating registry points with your algorithm? Somebody doesn’t like the points for a book? Take it up with Overstreet.

Yes, this would be the optimal solution, but I don't see it happening.

 

I am going to push for a base score across the board for 9.0, maybe 9.2, not sure yet.  This will resolve a number of issues with scoring.  It will also make completion percentage, photos, and descriptions more important than the total score.  This is the way it should be, in my opinion.

If it is determined that we need another tier score for keys, we can look at ways to implement that.  This would be difficult, due to the research time, and the criteria for what truly makes an individual book a "key".

 

Keep in mind that this is for next year's "season", no changes will be made until after next year's awards are announced.

 

We are also discussing a longer "freeze" time for the registry in order to limit the goalposts being moved.

After that, I am going to go over the individual sets, and attempt to define a standard competitive set.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/17/2022 at 2:26 PM, wytshus said:

I am going to push for a base score across the board for 9.0, maybe 9.2, not sure yet.  This will resolve a number of issues with scoring.  It will also make completion percentage, photos, and descriptions more important than the total score. 

I want to understand this better.

Here is my question:

Boardie A has 7 issues of The Amazing Spider-man in 9.8 condition from 1967, and Boardie B has 7 issues of The Amazing Spider-man in 9.8 condition from 2019. Neither set of books has any "keys." Do both sets score the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the same vein, I would enjoy some examples of what the points would then look like?

Cause that sounds as though it would be detrimental to moderns?

Already an 8.5 for most moderns are like 5. points, only doing 9.0 and above, means even MORE 1 point grades :( 

I mean how does that encourage someone to complete a set? I've got newsstands and or regulars, that if I got rid of all my 1 point or even 10 point and lower?

My average would be like 175 points per book, and I'd only lose about 100 points. But I collect them and there are registry slots, and how is this "encouraging?"

I'm confused by the flat rate to 9.0 and above or lower, and why the apparent afront to moderns or casual collecting.

I'll give you it is more casual, and the registry is supposed to be "elite" or something, but that doesn't "encourage" or point to inclusive when all the points go down?

On 11/17/2022 at 1:26 PM, wytshus said:

I am going to push for a base score across the board for 9.0, maybe 9.2, not sure yet.  This will resolve a number of issues with scoring.  It will also make completion percentage, photos, and descriptions more important than the total score.  This is the way it should be, in my opinion.

If it is determined that we need another tier score for keys, we can look at ways to implement that.  This would be difficult, due to the research time, and the criteria for what truly makes an individual book a "key".

Keep in mind that this is for next year's "season", no changes will be made until after next year's awards are announced. We are also discussing a longer "freeze" time for the registry in order to limit the goalposts being moved.

After that, I am going to go over the individual sets, and attempt to define a standard competitive set.

It may encourage more people with pics and etc, but it won't be an "incentive" to do so, it'll be just added work involved to be considered. I do all of the above because I'm able while watching tv or inbetween projects that work themselves for a while before it requires me again.

The point? :makepoint: I don't think this will incentivise, or not in an "obvious" way, and what it a "freeze" is that before points change again or "goalposts?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/17/2022 at 7:26 PM, wytshus said:

I am going to push for a base score across the board for 9.0, maybe 9.2, not sure yet.  This will resolve a number of issues with scoring.

How would this work wrt Detective Comics, as no 9.2s (or higher) exist for several of the first issues (featuring Batman) ? Even more so for Detective #1 - #26.

28 - 2 in 9.0, none higher

31 - 1 in 8.0, none higher

36 - 2 in 8.5, none higher

37 - 1 in 9.0, none higher

Ditto for early Action Comics.

Edited by Gotham Kid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Keep in mind that the algorithm is SUPPOSED to weigh individual scores according to grading category, desirability, and scarcity.

The raw scores would be consistent for Universal across the board.  This will eliminate the outrageous point spreads in sets with high value keys.  It will also give photos, descriptions, and completion percentage a bigger role in the competition, and the awards.  I really like the idea of a completion modifier, and I will let you guys know how feasible that is.  I would also like a modifier for photos and descriptions, but I don't have write access to the database, and I am NOT a DBA.  I would have to make a request for the code change, and justify the labor time.....

I don't expect this to please everyone.  That is impossible.  Something has to give on scoring, the status quo is not sustainable...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
On 11/19/2022 at 11:20 AM, ADAMANTIUM said:

what it a "freeze" is that before points change again or "goalposts?"

During the award selection process, we implement a freeze on changes to the sets.  During this freeze, we simply stop modifying the registry.  

It has been stated earlier that the goalposts keep moving due to slot additions, set creations, and score adjustments. I agree with this completely, and my boss suggested extending the freeze time to eliminate this issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/21/2022 at 12:10 PM, wytshus said:

During the award selection process, we implement a freeze on changes to the sets.  During this freeze, we simply stop modifying the registry.  

It has been stated earlier that the goalposts keep moving due to slot additions, set creations, and score adjustments. I agree with this completely, and my boss suggested extending the freeze time to eliminate this issue.

Ah thank you for clarifying :) I've been working hard on mine, while chopping and such for Thursday! :wishluck:

Have a good one this week :whee: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will there be a completion bunus (that last filled slot pays off big) or an incompleteness penalty (having tons of empty slots really really hurts) or both?

If one starts with 

     f = occupied slots / total slots

The set score could be modified by multiplying by f, or for more extreme adjustments f*f or sqrt(f) depending on the desired result.

A drawback of this system is that collectors collecting a subset of a set would probably ask for that subset to become a new set to avoid a bad modifier.

I personally like having slots scored by fair market price (as much as possible) and set scores having modifiers for occupancy and presentation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

 

On 11/21/2022 at 8:13 PM, Rosland said:

Will there be a completion bunus (that last filled slot pays off big) or an incompleteness penalty (having tons of empty slots really really hurts) or both?

I was thinking just a simple multiplier based on completion percentage.  

However, not all sets are created equally, like you said.  Standardization of sets would be needed to make it fair, and that would be a massive undertaking.

 

On 11/21/2022 at 8:13 PM, Rosland said:

I personally like having slots scored by fair market price (as much as possible) and set scores having modifiers for occupancy and presentation.

In a perfect world, that would be totally reasonable.  The problem is the registry does not represent the market.  The score weights are based on CGC census data.  Basing raw scores on market value was the best choice at the time the registry was created.  I don't think anyone could have predicted the size of the registry as it sits today.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know sets don't go by prices only, but are sets set buy the rarest and or priciest est book, then trickle down in the set from there? An option?

Each book adjusted on its own? I'm looking at some sets like, qv500 boardie I think, and I wonder how I'm close in points to all those 9.8's and 9.9's. Maybe I don't give myself credit, but if I remember in 7 months I know whom I'll nominate.

Curious if in the end with adjustments next year I'm going up in points or down? That's a curious 🧐 thing ....

If I'll survive hahaha.

Edit to say most of my silver age is well below 9.0, if that helps surmise anything 

 

Edited by ADAMANTIUM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

All requests were submitted in good faith under the review system as it was then understood and at the time the thread was locked down Brian did commit to fulfil all remaining requests.

It would also be interesting if Brian could update us on any timescales for drafting and issue of proposals for a new Registry scoring model.

Many thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take:

1. There are already Newsstand Slots in competitive sets now

2. If you don't want to buy a newsstand or variant and grade it, then don't. No one is forced to participate in the Registry. 

3. Newsstands and Direct Editions are not the same. Ask the people with a Spawn 1 Newsstand, Ultimate Fallout 4 Newstand, Spider-Man 1 1990 Gold UPC Newsstand if it's the same as the Direct Edition.  Look at the scoring on the last book I mentioned and tell me if you think the Registry regards them as equal.

4. LOCKING SETS SO NEW BOOKS CANT BE ADDED IS A COMPLETE NO-GO FOR ME. There are sets that exist now that are incomplete. Below are three sets where I have the top set but I know for a fact not all the books are listed:

   A. Deathstroke (2014) - Missing several Variants and the last few issues of the series.

   B. Robotech Defenders - Missing the Canadian Price Variants 

   C. War of the Realms (New Agents of Atlas) - Missing Issue #4 First Print.

I could go on but we already know that this is the case

5. We can't do a completion bonus on sets that dont have all the books listed. What if I got a completion bonus on a set that was actually incomplete and a new book is added. Would i lose the bonus?  

6. And why on Earth have competetive sets that aren't eligible for awards?  Because not enough 'other' people have collected them as well?  Hmmmmm?

I think that Spawn is a perfect example of a set that should have Newsstand Slots created (especially on those first few issues). 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regard to the "problem" of moderns being equivalent point-wise to older books, maybe have an age adjustment calculation?

In the vein of what Quaylar suggested (using a base 1-5 scale), maybe just use the actual grades as the scale and add variables from there.

My Starlight #1 CGC 9.8 Variant would have a base value of 9.8.  It was printed in 2014, add 0.8 (0.1 for each year).  It's a first appearance of the main characters (add 0.5).  There are 16 copies of the 20 total copies at 9.8 on the census (add 0.5 IF "X" grade is top 20%).  Set complete (Y/N, If Y = +1.0).

Plenty more adjustment categories to consider, but it may be something that could work.  That one person with the Action 1 CGC 9.0 shouldn't be able to win the Registry every year due to the one book alone (although it's an incredible book!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/24/2022 at 10:15 PM, Yorick said:

That one person with the Action 1 CGC 9.0 shouldn't be able to win the Registry every year due to the one book alone (although it's an incredible book!).

That same person owns BOTH Action1 9.0 copies and he doesn't use the registry :gossip:

Edited by Gotham Kid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/24/2022 at 3:05 PM, Gotham Kid said:

That same person owns BOTH Action1 9.0 copies and he doesn't use the registry :gossip:

Yes (and my preference is for the non-Cage copy with much brighter cover inks).  I was just giving an example.  In the same vein, he could win the "Action Comics 1-300 Set", the "Action Comics 1-500 Set", the "Action Comics Complete Set", etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/24/2022 at 3:15 PM, Yorick said:

In regard to the "problem" of moderns being equivalent point-wise to older books,

I would vote for a fix to this problem. Scarcity & desirability play the main role obviously... :preach:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

The way individual scoring is supposed to work is:

 

Base Score x Category Modifier x Algorithm Modifier = Weighted Score

 

I only have write access to the Base Score. The rest is determined by the back end.  After the Holidays, I am going to try to get a look at how the algorithm works.  There are a number of anomalies that I suspect are due to issues with the Census. 

Once again, I DO NOT have write access to the Census.  

What I want to happen is to let the algorithm do the heavy lifting when it comes to a final individual score.  Having a fixed base score levels the field, and puts more emphasis on set completion percentage and descriptions/photos.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
5 5