• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GRADING CONTEST : Round 4

Started by nik,

103 posts in this topic

burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
No offense, but CGC blew that one. I guess I have MINT raw comics to submit to CGC this weekend. It's still a 7.5/8.0 to me.

 

Out of all the competent graders in this contest , only 2 were correct?

 

2??

 

Those are not good odds imho.

 

I applaud Nik for throwing us off our game, but man.. 9.2? Post that book in the grading forum.

 

Next time I am closing my eyes and throwing a dart at the grading board

 

I might just make a run.

 

Ze-

 

first off - i'm NOT complaining - just confused............

 

over 90 contestants with varying degrees of grading skills see the same book and only 2 get it right and the other 92 all guess LOWER?!?!? 893whatthe.gif

 

here's the thing, that might happen if everyone guessed HIGHER because of some internal defect but seems almost impossible when the obvious defects are visible for all to see.

 

deep, color breaking crease (albeit small) URC. immediately visible color loss/rub from ULC. spine stress lines at both upper staple tines. additional loss of color on LRC (not as obvious as ULC). and i guess production creases on both the front and back cover that don't count.

 

more than half the folks missed this one by 3 grades insane.gif and 98% undergraded the book............. confused.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Zipper

Mr. Zipper

Posted
Posted
more than half the folks missed this one by 3 grades insane.gif and 98% undergraded the book............. confused.gif

 

That's a pretty good indicator that CGC grossly overgraded this book. With the color loss at the top of the spine and the HARD corner crease, I figured 7.5 was about right.

 

confused-smiley-013.gif

 

So much for DCs always getting hammered by CGC...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
more than half the folks missed this one by 3 grades insane.gif and 98% undergraded the book............. confused.gif

 

That's a pretty good indicator that CGC grossly overgraded this book. With the color loss at the top of the spine and the HARD corner crease, I figured 7.5 was about right.

 

confused-smiley-013.gif

 

So much for DCs always getting hammered by CGC...

 

after having submitted so many HG SA DC's and thinking they were routinely graded tougher than Marvels, this little book comes along and knocks me out.....

 

I mean, looking at that ULC all by itself, what's the likely highest possible grade??

certainly not a 9.6, so let's assume a 9.4 would be possible.

 

how much does the deep URC crease then pull it down??

at least to a 9.2???

 

so then the two obvious spine stresses by the staples and the loss of color on the LRC (I asked Nik and he confirmed that one) and the front and back production creases have no further impact on grade????893whatthe.gif

 

oh well, on to round 5. looks like a bunch of folks who aren't doing well may just be dropping out........... blush.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ze-man

Ze-man

Posted
Posted

Well, it IS fun Nik dont get us wrong, but at the same time this contest should be used as a barometer to see how we all stack up against CGC's Grading. And as Harry said.. it is one thing for everyone to over grade because of hidden flaws that are not represented in a scan all that well. But it is another for everyone to under grade so badly as a whole, even though all the flaws ARE clearly visible in the scan(even if they are bigger then when you have the book in hand)

 

Should we chalk this up to CGC dropping the ball instead of trying to rethink what is acceptable in a 9.2? To me there is a difference between complaining about our guess versus trying to figure out how, and why CGC came up with the grade they did. Because I hope we all get better at grading through this exercise, not walk away scratching our heads having to rethink everything we thought we knew about grading.

 

Would you have listed the Round #4 book in Marketplace as a 9.2.. you have the book in front of you, and we allI trust your grading.

 

With that said.. When you post the results for each book.. Would you mind including the grader notes and also what you graded it before you sent it in? That would help(me at least) try and figure out why my grade might be higher or lower based on more facts then just the scan.

 

For instance, we all might take off more or less for foxing, or a scuff or a spine break then the next person, so when we see it present in a book and see it, or don't see it in CGC's notes we can tally it up and move on all the wiser.

 

Just a few thoughts Nik, not like you don't have enough on your plate as it is.

 

flowerred.gif

 

I will still throw my dart and make a guess each round either way. And hopefully hit the mark at least once before the contest ends.

 

Ze-

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UKavenger

UKavenger

Posted
Posted

It could, of course, mean, that the majority of people on here are just too harsh with their standards. Unless a book has been wrapped up in cotton wool all its life there are bound to be some flaws. I have only been here a couple of months or so and I have already said in the PGM threads, that the grading there is very harsh, it may be better to err on the side of caution, but maybe you have to stand back, think about things a bit more evenly and say to yourself "Is it really as bad/good as I first thought..... but hey..... what do I know??? insane.gifhi.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
Posted
more than half the folks missed this one by 3 grades insane.gif and 98% undergraded the book............. confused.gif

 

That's a pretty good indicator that CGC grossly overgraded this book.

 

Actually, all it really indicates is . . . "GRADING FROM A SCAN IS NOT RELIABLE, it's just interesting. "

 

grin.gifgrin.gifgrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ze-man

Ze-man

Posted
Posted
Da Bears!!.. Will Lose.. poke2.gif

 

Ah, what do you know, you can't even grade a run of the mill 9.2. poke2.gif

 

If that book is a 9.2 then Grossman is a HOF quarterback!

 

stooges.gif

 

 

tongue.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nik

nik

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Too be honest, all the books used for this contest minus a couple were just random books I pulled without double checking before submitting.

 

I know what books I like to keep raw grade wise but if I submitted those then the contest would be pretty dull if nothing but 9.2 - 9.6 kept on popping up. Yeah cost wise for subbing some was pretty dumb but its all for entertainment anyways.

 

If someone wants notes, at the end of the contest I would be more then happy to provide the serial number and you personally can find out for yourself flowerred.gif

 

 

Dont forget, there is still a hidden PLOD for one of these rounds somewhere thats worth an additional 3 points devil.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weird Paper

Weird Paper

Posted
Posted
more than half the folks missed this one by 3 grades insane.gif and 98% undergraded the book............. confused.gif

 

That's a pretty good indicator that CGC grossly overgraded this book.

 

Actually, all it really indicates is . . . "GRADING FROM A SCAN IS NOT RELIABLE, it's just interesting. "

 

grin.gifgrin.gifgrin.gif

 

All I know is if someone sent me that book raw, as a NM-, I would send it back without giving it a second thought. I have books CGC graded as 8.0 which look nicer than that one. Is there a Neal Adams bump?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DeeDee-migration

DeeDee-migration

Posted
Posted
more than half the folks missed this one by 3 grades insane.gif and 98% undergraded the book............. confused.gif

 

That's a pretty good indicator that CGC grossly overgraded this book.

 

Actually, all it really indicates is . . . "GRADING FROM A SCAN IS NOT RELIABLE, it's just interesting. "

 

grin.gifgrin.gifgrin.gif

 

All I know is if someone sent me that book raw, as a NM-, I would send it back without giving it a second thought. I have books CGC graded as 8.0 which look nicer than that one. Is there a Neal Adams bump?

 

I agree. Nothing against Nik here, but that book isn't a 9.2. I have 7.5s that look way nicer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing