• 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.

2000 CE: When pressing was restoration...
1 1

104 posts in this topic

20 minutes ago, pickycollector said:

Meet me or have somebody meet me with about 100 raw books (more if you want) that are equally distributed by period, i.e. something like 25 GA books, 25 SA books, 24 BA books and 25 CA/MA books. Among them, you will select books that you know that have been pressed (by you or anyone else) and other books that you know that have NOT been pressed. I tell you that I will be able to detect the pressed books with a score of at least 95%. If not, I will eat my words and publicly apologize. If yes, you will.

Your challenge is impossible. First, where are you going to find books that you will accept have never been pressed? I have tens of thousands of books that have never been pressed, because I bought them new, or bought them when they weren't worth pressing (and still aren't), and hardly anyone knew about pressing. Are you going to trust that I will produce books that haven't been pressed? It's easy to rig such a challenge.

Second, I have no access to 25 GA books that "I know" haven't been pressed. As noted above, mid to low grade books are certainly detectable; they're "flat" where they shouldn't be, like at color breaking creases and the like. And I don't have access to upper mid to high grade Gold or Silver. Who is going to provide such unpressed books, and demonstrate that they've "never been pressed"? And if you managed to find such books, again, it would be easy to rig such a challenge: just add a little edge bend that could be pressed back out. 

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Just because a book doesn't appear to be pressed, doesn't mean it hasn't. Conversely...though it's easier...just because a book looks like it HAS been pressed, doesn't necessarily mean it has. 

48 minutes ago, pickycollector said:

Moreover, I have a life outside this forum and do not want to spend time or energy in an endless debate.

You are in complete control of that, and don't let anyone ever try to tell you otherwise. You need not debate anyone longer than you wish to, ever. You have perfect freedom and control to end any debate you're a part of, at any time, for any reason, or no reason at all, simply by not continuing to take part. You have the power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rig the challenge? I would expect and I am pretty sure that you would be honest enough to not lie about the pressing status of your books, right?

This challenge can be done. We can discuss other terms if you want. We can use other's people books. We can use only expensive books so that there will be no temptation to add a little edge bend.

I can do this challenge with any other presser. Some other anti-presser may want to take the mantle in my place if he's geographically nearer to your place. It is NOT impossible and you know it.

You are right though. I will stop the debate here since you will never take this challenge. That is what I thought. You would have lost anyway. You just made my point.

Anyone whom want to take such a pressing detection contest with me, just let me know.

Have a great day everybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, pickycollector said:

Rig the challenge? I would expect and I am pretty sure that you would be honest enough to not lie about the pressing status of your books, right?

This challenge can be done. We can discuss other terms if you want. We can use other's people books. We can use only expensive books so that there will be no temptation to add a little edge bend.

I can do this challenge with any other presser. Some other anti-presser may want to take the mantle in my place if he's geographically nearer to your place. It is NOT impossible and you know it.

You are right though. I will stop the debate here since you will never take this challenge. That is what I thought. You would have lost anyway. You just made my point.

Anyone whom want to take such a pressing detection contest with me, just let me know.

Have a great day everybody.

I really don't think you read what I wrote, but oh well. There is simply no way to PROVE that a book HAS NOT been pressed. Just because *I* didn't press it, doesn't mean someone else didn't. That's great that you think I would be honest enough to not lie about the pressing status of my books now, but I don't trust that you would say the same thing on the chance that you lose...and, with the bar at 95%, you almost certainly would. And then there would be nothing whatsoever to prevent you from claiming then that the contest was, in fact, rigged, despite any precautions taken. And then what?

It's a setup for everyone to fail, regardless of the truth of the matter. You could completely GUESS and still come out with a pretty good percentage correct. That's not scientific.

"You would have lost anyway" are not the words of someone with an open mind on the issue. "You know it" are also not the words of someone with an open mind. How do you know what other people do and do not know?

If you manage to get someone to accept your challenge, good luck to you. I would be fascinated by such an event, despite the substantial pitfalls facing anyone willing to do such a thing. If you can come up with scientific controls, you might have something. No pressing advocate worth his salt would dream of taking such a challenge as stated. "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." 

 

Edited by RockMyAmadeus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In skimming this thread, I think there are a couple of important things that have been missed.
1) The OP posted a pic of work done by Matt Wilson, all of which included disassembly, and is still considered restoration.  That specific book, regardless of how the pressing was done (and with the things done to the book, it had to be pressed once it was put back together), would have gotten PLOD.
2) When Borock made his initial statements about pressing not being considered restoration, it was based on not being able to detect HOW it happened with certainty.  He didn't say they couldn't tell, he just said he couldn't tell if it occurred when someone put a book into a press last week or if it happened over a long period of time because of being stacked for a couple of decades, like is reported with many of the Church books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Stronguy said:

In skimming this thread, I think there are a couple of important things that have been missed.
1) The OP posted a pic of work done by Matt Wilson, all of which included disassembly, and is still considered restoration.  That specific book, regardless of how the pressing was done (and with the things done to the book, it had to be pressed once it was put back together), would have gotten PLOD.
2) When Borock made his initial statements about pressing not being considered restoration, it was based on not being able to detect HOW it happened with certainty.  He didn't say they couldn't tell, he just said he couldn't tell if it occurred when someone put a book into a press last week or if it happened over a long period of time because of being stacked for a couple of decades, like is reported with many of the Church books.

Regarding #2, the argument about not being able to detect HOW it happened with certainty is puzzling to me. Take a similar situation like a bindery flaw. We know they are lenient with Bindery flaws. but this is a judgement call. They cannot tell for certain that a chip was impact or Bindery. I know from personal experience they sometimes get it wrong. In fact, some will take advantage of this judgement call to game the system, fool CGC. If you believe in long term business plans, pressing and inhouse services were part of the plan. It's all good. I feel much better about CGC doing the pressing than the DIY'ers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Regarding #2, the argument about not being able to detect HOW it happened with certainty is puzzling to me.

This was debated ad nauseam back in the day.  "That" it was pressed wasn't the issues, it was "how" and the intent behind it.  Mile Highs were specifically mentioned because the books that were at the bottom of the stacks were flat-flat-flat.  They didn't want the graders to have to determine if a book was pressed as a result of storage, not meeting the definition of restoration in that it was done "with the intent to improve the appearance", or if it was indeed an intentional cosmetic enhancement.

Make no mistake, the decision was not entirely without political pressure, just like the decision to allow minor glue/ct on GA books.  There was a vocal and key demographic that had a vested interest in their books not getting stigmatized. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Stronguy said:

This was debated ad nauseam back in the day.  "That" it was pressed wasn't the issues, it was "how" and the intent behind it.  Mile Highs were specifically mentioned because the books that were at the bottom of the stacks were flat-flat-flat.  They didn't want the graders to have to determine if a book was pressed as a result of storage, not meeting the definition of restoration in that it was done "with the intent to improve the appearance", or if it was indeed an intentional cosmetic enhancement.

Yes, because you can get similar, or even the same, results from stacking that you can from the pressing process...it just takes a much longer time...and since you can't determine intent, it was foolish and dangerous to state "this book has been pressed" if it had just sat under a stack for 30 years.

The absence of flaws, even tiny ones, does not necessarily indicate the presence of a press.

By the way...my original owner copies of books I bought in the early 90s, that have sat in their bags and boards for 25+ years? Flat as flat can be, and never saw the inside of a press.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I really don't think you read what I wrote, but oh well. There is simply no way to PROVE that a book HAS NOT been pressed. Just because *I* didn't press it, doesn't mean someone else didn't. That's great that you think I would be honest enough to not lie about the pressing status of my books now, but I don't trust that you would say the same thing on the chance that you lose...and, with the bar at 95%, you almost certainly would. And then there would be nothing whatsoever to prevent you from claiming then that the contest was, in fact, rigged, despite any precautions taken. And then what?

It's a setup for everyone to fail, regardless of the truth of the matter. You could completely GUESS and still come out with a pretty good percentage correct. That's not scientific.

"You would have lost anyway" are not the words of someone with an open mind on the issue. "You know it" are also not the words of someone with an open mind. How do you know what other people do and do not know?

If you manage to get someone to accept your challenge, good luck to you. I would be fascinated by such an event, despite the substantial pitfalls facing anyone willing to do such a thing. If you can come up with scientific controls, you might have something. No pressing advocate worth his salt would dream of taking such a challenge as stated. "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." 

 

I can without question supply 25 Golden Age books that were not pressed. Id love to get them pressed, and to get them pressed for FREE? I'm in!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FlyingDonut said:

I can without question supply 25 Golden Age books that were not pressed. Id love to get them pressed, and to get them pressed for FREE? I'm in!

What condition are they in? Low grade books are easy tells. They get all flat where they shouldn't be. 

And who said you were getting them pressed...? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Regarding #2, the argument about not being able to detect HOW it happened with certainty is puzzling to me. Take a similar situation like a bindery flaw. We know they are lenient with Bindery flaws. but this is a judgement call. They cannot tell for certain that a chip was impact or Bindery. I know from personal experience they sometimes get it wrong. In fact, some will take advantage of this judgement call to game the system, fool CGC. If you believe in long term business plans, pressing and inhouse services were part of the plan. It's all good. I feel much better about CGC doing the pressing than the DIY'ers.

hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/24/2018 at 10:00 AM, Bomber-Bob said:

Picky, I totally concur except for one point. I don't think your post will have a reaction at all. The collectors that like unpressed books are in such a minority that we don't even merit a debate anymore. 

 

On 9/24/2018 at 10:12 AM, pickycollector said:

lol

Yeah, you may be right. The last time I did post about pressing was a long time ago, when pressing threads were flaming debates in the CGC Forum.

Back in the "old days", this thread would have been 100 pages by now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

What condition are they in? Low grade books are easy tells. They get all flat where they shouldn't be. 

And who said you were getting them pressed...? lol

Fine to VF across the board. Original owner books. Like this one:

blazecarson001.jpeg

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
1 1