Turning a 9.6 to a 9.8? 0

[Sky1]

Anyone have any success stories on what they did or even some general insight about this?  If you get a 9.6 is it possible to say you got a super picky grader & try it again?  NOT to insult anyone's grading standards, I'm glad they are there.  It's just the grades seem too close together to say you can't get it up there in my opinion. Thanks!

Edited September 13, 2018 by Sky1

[revat]

52 minutes ago, Sky1 said:

Anyone have any success stories on what they did or even some general insight about this?  If you get a 9.6 is it possible to say you got a super picky grader & try it again?  NOT to insult anyone's grading standards, I'm glad they are there.  It's just the grades seem too close together to say you can't get it up there in my opinion. Thanks!

There are some people who 'press' and resub with some amount of success.  There are also some time periods where people believe grading was 'tighter', and some adventurous folks might take books submitted during those periods and resub them if they believe the current grading is more 'loose'. 

I don't really know if people are sharing how successful they are and what methods they use to determine what is a good candidate, other than if there are some obvious pressable flaws, or older graded books that were probably submitted before pressing was a thing.  I don't think you'll find hard stats you can trust, but there are people who 'try' for sure.

[Bomber-Bob]

If there is an obvious flaw, even minor, it will not 'magically' grade a 9.8 with a new submission, even with a different grader. If the flaw can be 'fixed', usually with a press, then it may grade a 9.8 the next time.

[valiantman]

I've heard from people who have used the 9.8 pre-screen process who have sent their "9.8 rejects" back in a second time (without (additional) pressing) and gotten 40% as 9.8s.  A beautiful CGC 9.6 is literally the best bargain in the market, since there are ugly 9.8s that cost twice as much.

Edited September 13, 2018 by valiantman

[Sky1]

4 hours ago, revat said:

There are some people who 'press' and resub with some amount of success.  There are also some time periods where people believe grading was 'tighter', and some adventurous folks might take books submitted during those periods and resub them if they believe the current grading is more 'loose'. 

I don't really know if people are sharing how successful they are and what methods they use to determine what is a good candidate, other than if there are some obvious pressable flaws, or older graded books that were probably submitted before pressing was a thing.  I don't think you'll find hard stats you can trust, but there are people who 'try' for sure.

Hey thanks for the info, it's sorta what I figured.  I guess I was hoping to hear something to motivate me into pressing/re-subbing vs it being a complete waste of time & money.  Looking at the book there isn't any visible flaws & a ongoing thread about a crooked staple getting a 9.8 makes me wonder.

[Sky1]

1 hour ago, valiantman said:

I've heard from people who have used the 9.8 pre-screen process who have sent their "9.8 rejects" back in a second time (without (additional) pressing) and gotten 40% as 9.8s.  A beautiful CGC 9.6 is literally the best bargain in the market, since there are ugly 9.8s that cost twice as much.

You check out the thread about a book with a bent staple getting a 9.8?  That should be a classic example of what a 9.6 looks like because other than that, it looks sharp.  Seeing a book that looks like a 9.8 get a 9.6 is just disheartening, lol.  I doubt a book with any inside rips and tears will be getting a 9.6 so wonder what it could be?

[revat]

2 hours ago, Sky1 said:

You check out the thread about a book with a bent staple getting a 9.8?  That should be a classic example of what a 9.6 looks like because other than that, it looks sharp.  Seeing a book that looks like a 9.8 get a 9.6 is just disheartening, lol.  I doubt a book with any inside rips and tears will be getting a 9.6 so wonder what it could be?

sometimes, if CGC determines the 'flaw' is based on production, they give it a pass, especially if it happens a lot for a given book.  And sometimes, however rare, the defect might occur during the encapsulation process.  And sometimes they just miss a grade.  and sometimes they type in the wrong number.  Each of those instances is fairly rare, but out of so many submissions, you figure there's definitely room for human error.

[Drbearsec]

7 hours ago, revat said:

There are some people who 'press' and resub with some amount of success.  There are also some time periods where people believe grading was 'tighter', and some adventurous folks might take books submitted during those periods and resub them if they believe the current grading is more 'loose'. 

I don't really know if people are sharing how successful they are and what methods they use to determine what is a good candidate, other than if there are some obvious pressable flaws, or older graded books that were probably submitted before pressing was a thing.  I don't think you'll find hard stats you can trust, but there are people who 'try' for sure.

Interesting.  What time periods are those?

[NP_Gresham]

Sent a few 9.6 to ‘Voldemort’

Their standard ‘drive-by’ grading has converted many to 9.8

That being said if you buy something with a lemon peel exterior why would anyone expect to find anything other than lemons on the interior

[Drbearsec]

21 minutes ago, NP_Gresham said:

Sent a few 9.6 to ‘Voldemort’

Their standard ‘drive-by’ grading has converted many to 9.8

That being said if you buy something with a lemon peel exterior why would anyone expect to find anything other than lemons on the interior

Interesting.  I've see several people on their forums post the EXACT same sentiments when sending their slabs to CGC.  

[RockMyAmadeus]

17 minutes ago, Drbearsec said:

Interesting.  I've see several people on their forums post the EXACT same sentiments when sending their slabs to CGC.  

The comments of the people who post on the CBCS forums should, generally speaking, be given the same weight as your typical speculation blog.

[Drbearsec]

6 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

The comments of the people who post on the CBCS forums should, generally speaking, be given the same weight as your typical speculation blog.

I usually give most posts citing anecdote as evidence that weight, regardless of the website. I will say in my own anecdotal, I don’t have any slabs I went from CGC to The other and the ones going form the other to CGC have all come out the same grade.  I just find famboyism of companies amusing is all.