2024 Grading Contest Spring Edition Season 3 (#10) Round 3 13 13

[GawkHawk]

2 bullseye and 5 total - better than the last round at least.

On a side note, I thought for a bit that the Next Men was mine.  I recently submitted one and it got a 9.4 also, but it looks like a different one.

[TSwift25]

I bullseye (Next Men). 9 points total ouch.

Under graded Flash, under graded SW, other than that badly overshot the Spidey and Cap 

[Lninefingers]

On 5/1/2024 at 1:23 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

And now I see a video from a CGC employee saying - if I heard it right - that she grades books by eye appeal. Not a great advert for CGC.

 

I see this as a major problem, because some graders clearly don’t grade by eye appeal. I don’t want to minimize the difficulty of the job, but consistent standards are paramount IMO. 
 

If some graders are going to hammer a barely visible stain and others will downplay the impact because it doesn’t hurt eye appeal I’m not sure where that leaves us as consumers….

[Axelrod]

On 5/1/2024 at 2:23 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

I went 6.5 too, basing that decision on CGC's own grading scale:

 

I would have called those staples a "major" defect all day every day.  I think there is zero chance the book gets a grade like that if the defect was visible.  

Still surprised.  Didn't CGC publish a grading guide recently?  Were rusty staples not covered in it?  Seems like this particular kind of defect ought to be easily quantifiable as far as "grade."  Even moreso than a stain, which can be of so many varied sizes and locations and hues.  

I liked the book as part of this contest because it narrowly focused in on this one singular defect, so - theoretically - you could really see how CGC viewed such a defect.  Unless, unfortunately, there's actually no standard and it's just how one individual grader feels about it....

[Get Marwood & I]

On 5/1/2024 at 1:50 PM, Axelrod said:

Didn't CGC publish a grading guide recently?  Were rusty staples not covered in it? 

I don't have a copy, but would be interested to see what it says on the matter if anyone else does.

[Cerebus3000]

On 5/1/2024 at 7:50 AM, Axelrod said:

 Didn't CGC publish a grading guide recently?  Were rusty staples not covered in it?  Seems like this particular kind of defect ought to be easily quantifiable as far as "grade." 

I relied on the book to come up with my grade, but it was still a bit of a swag. The book says "slight to moderate rust that has not migrated to the paper can affect grade down to 9.0 or 9.2, while paper migration may move the grade lower.  Heavy rust with significant paper migration can fall between 6.0 and 7.0."

I didn't consider the migration to be "significant" (I have seen way worse) so I figured the grade must be lower than 9.0 and higher than 7.0.  I split the difference at 8.0 and got lucky (I was leaning toward 7.5).

[TSwift25]

I too was surprised by the SW 8 grade. I had it at 7.0.

 

I have the CGC grading guide and this is what it said regarding rusted staples and rust migration. I know there's the famous Action 1 with the rusty staples in 8.5 and I've seen slightly rusted staples in VF range grades, but I thought that rust migration would (1) put it at best in the F/VF category (and that book to me is otherwise 9.4/9.6) and (2) would warrant a graders note on the label that the rust had migrated to the centerfold. Frankly, if there was ever a situation for a "qualified" grade with a rusted staple, that book may be it. For reference, here are the applicable pages from the grading guide:

 

[F For Fake]

On 4/30/2024 at 8:11 PM, grendelbo said:

3 bullseyes. Really missed the Flash. I had it as a 6.0.

5 points.

 

On 4/30/2024 at 8:10 PM, Crose87420 said:

I was lower than that...

 

On 4/30/2024 at 8:07 PM, WilliamLunt said:

Killed on the flash :D, gave it a 6.5

Ok, this makes me feel better, I had the Flash at a 6.0 as well.

Let's see, one Bullseye (Cap), one just a grade off (Spidey), and the others...uh...not as close!

I was really curious about the SW book, those rust stains are naaaaaasty. I knocked it down to a 7.0, no way I would call a book with a fugly defect like that VF. I had to hold my nose to give it the 7.0!

The game is always fun and informative. Let's see how much worse I can do!

[Axelrod]

Well, on the plus side, those pages from the grading guide at least suggest that the grade didn't come completely out of the grader's ***, agree or otherwise disagree as we might. 

I would have said that was pretty "heavy" rust, and the paper migration looked pretty "significant" to me, though, sure, I guess it could have been even worse.  

[Get Marwood & I]

On 5/1/2024 at 2:16 PM, Axelrod said:

Well, on the plus side, those pages from the grading guide at least suggest that the grade didn't come completely out of the grader's ***, agree or otherwise disagree as we might. 

I would have said that was pretty "heavy" rust, and the paper migration looked pretty "significant" to me, though, sure, I guess it could have been even worse.  

This is one of the areas where I am miles away from CGC. I understand the desire to give a book the best grade it deserves, but I would never give a book like this an 8.0:

 

Rusted staples are degenerative under the wrong conditions, and I just can't get behind the degrees of severity thing which allows books to be graded as high when the staples are sufficiently degraded to have stained the pages all the way through to the back cover. Flaws like water damage, trimming, mould and rusted staples should really have grade points beyond which they cannot go, regardless of eye appeal. 

If you asked 100 collectors to buy that book, as an 8.0, and then cracked it open, how many of them would be satisfied seeing that rust do you think? How many would say "Yes, that level of rust is consistent with an 8.0 grade"? Still, that's what CGC do and they're a private company. Matt has a lot of experience, but it doesn't mean others have to agree with the standards that he unilaterally commits to paper.

[zzutak]

The thing I found most interesting about Book #13 (Secret Wars #8) was the distribution of rust/staining at the bottom staple -- clean at the cover but heavy at the centerfold.  In my experience, quite unusual.

Edited May 1 by zzutak

[TSwift25]

On 5/1/2024 at 9:16 AM, Axelrod said:

Well, on the plus side, those pages from the grading guide at least suggest that the grade didn't come completely out of the grader's ***, agree or otherwise disagree as we might. 

I would have said that was pretty "heavy" rust, and the paper migration looked pretty "significant" to me, though, sure, I guess it could have been even worse.  

Yes it's a weird one for sure and why this contest is so fun. I agree with you and would call it significant (but I think any time it goes from staple to paper it would be significant). That said, with it only being the bottom staple, perhaps the "significant" designation is reserved for situations where both staples are presenting migration, or, as the guide notes, staple(s) are disintegrating.

[Lninefingers]

On 5/1/2024 at 8:40 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

This is one of the areas where I am miles away from CGC. I understand the desire to give a book the best grade it deserves, but I would never give a book like this an 8.0:

 

Rusted staples are degenerative under the wrong conditions, and I just can't get behind the degrees of severity thing which allows books to be graded as high when the staples are sufficiently degraded to have stained the pages all the way through to the back cover. Flaws like water damage, trimming, mould and rusted staples should really have grade points beyond which they cannot go, regardless of eye appeal. 

If you asked 100 collectors to buy that book, as an 8.0, and then cracked it open, how many of them would be satisfied seeing that rust do you think? How many would say "Yes, that level of rust is consistent with an 8.0 grade"? Still, that's what CGC do and they're a private company. Matt has a lot of experience, but it doesn't mean others have to agree with the standards that he unilaterally commits to paper.

I'm right there with you. 

And on the other side of the coin, you see books with barely visible stains that get hammered mercilessly. It just seems that there's a disconnect between how these books would be received "in the wild" versus the grade treatment they receive. 

[JollyComics]

On 5/1/2024 at 8:16 AM, Axelrod said:

Well, on the plus side, those pages from the grading guide at least suggest that the grade didn't come completely out of the grader's ***, agree or otherwise disagree as we might. 

I would have said that was pretty "heavy" rust, and the paper migration looked pretty "significant" to me, though, sure, I guess it could have been even worse.  

CGC graders said how much appeal upon the book before looking for any significant defects.  SW #8 looks like 9.2/9.4 before the staples. The appeal will tell the grade then downgrade from that point with those defects.

[Vince G]

On 5/1/2024 at 9:05 AM, TSwift25 said:

I too was surprised by the SW 8 grade. I had it at 7.0.

 

I have the CGC grading guide and this is what it said regarding rusted staples and rust migration. I know there's the famous Action 1 with the rusty staples in 8.5 and I've seen slightly rusted staples in VF range grades, but I thought that rust migration would (1) put it at best in the F/VF category (and that book to me is otherwise 9.4/9.6) and (2) would warrant a graders note on the label that the rust had migrated to the centerfold. Frankly, if there was ever a situation for a "qualified" grade with a rusted staple, that book may be it. For reference, here are the applicable pages from the grading guide:

 

Yep.  I have the guide and saw the same.  I graded it as low as I could based on the guide notes.  It's pretty clear to me that they have seriously loosened the standards on a bunch of defects.  In days past, you were lucky to get anything higher than a 6.0 with that type of defect present.

 

[ADAMANTIUM]

6 pts for me, best round so far  

[Ride the Tiger]

It would be interesting to send the same book to all 3 grading companies to see what grades they would give it. The SW 8 that is.

Edited May 1 by Ride the Tiger
Add text

[Mr. Zipper]

On 4/30/2024 at 8:42 PM, ChrispyC66 said:

My very raw, very cranky reaction about the Cap book grade is 
I originally had it graded as a 9.0/9.2 and saw that 4” white line on the back cover and thought it was a crease and downgraded the book to a 7.0.

I think throwing in books with barely visible non-defects is screwed up, That book is unfair specimen and playing outside the margins 

This goes beyond guessing the grade and into “what’s the grainy white line on the back cover? Is it a 4” crease or did someone lose a string from their shirt when scanning the book?” 

Congrats to the players who missed the line and aced the grade on the book 

Same. 7.0 on Cap due to what seemed like a massive crease. I was so proud of myself for not missing the hard-to-see crease... that didn't age well. 

[zzutak]

On 5/1/2024 at 8:20 AM, Ride the Tiger said:

It would be interesting to send the same book to all 3 grading companies

Three grading companies?  I personally would not honor PGX by placing it in the same category as CGC and :censored:.  PGX has whiffed more than once on issues like completeness, condition grade, and well-established pedigree markings.  But maybe you're not thinking of PGX. 

[CGC Mike]

Here are the results.