7th Annual Green Eggs Grading Contest - FINAL ROUND 10 4 4

[WPPJames]

Just now, skypinkblu said:

I finally got the last 2 right

On the 20th book I finally got my first +1. Took until the bitter end to finally hit for the cycle. Only took to book #2 to get my first -1. I guess a -1 would be equivalent to grounding into a double play?

[thirdgreenham]

23 minutes ago, jcjames said:

Wish I could stay for the rest, but I'm off to get scanned and irradiated up the yingyang.

@thirdgreenham, I PM'd you the list last night, hope you got it (not that I'm even in the running for anything after these last two rounds). Thanks though!

 

Good luck.  

[Crops068]

5 minutes ago, porcupine48 said:

If you're in the area,pick me up!Can I bring the dog?She loves car rides

Only if she gets along with others.

[porcupine48]

Better set up a play date first.Pineapples 95 pound's and doesn't always realize  thinks she's a lap dog.

She also lived in the wilds of northern Manitoba before her rescue-no humans,so always cautious meeting new friends.She has a shady past 

[skypinkblu]

4 minutes ago, WPPJames said:

On the 20th book I finally got my first +1. Took until the bitter end to finally hit for the cycle. Only took to book #2 to get my first -1. I guess a -1 would be equivalent to grounding into a double play?

Actually, I posted the correct scores to two friends this morning, but I posted the wrong scores (from notes on another round to Andy, yesterday)...hence the mix up.

I got 6 points, I'm more than happy. 

[Crops068]

1 minute ago, porcupine48 said:

Better set up a play date first.Pineapples 95 pound's and doesn't always realize  thinks she's a lap dog.

She also lived in the wilds of northern Manitoba before her rescue-no humans,so always cautious meeting new friends.She has a shady past 

Ha, well Ruby loves everyone.  But is absolutely terrified of all other animal types.  Bunnies in the back yard, she runs from them.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Something that might help people in the future: CGC grades on a "platform" basis, meaning that they don't grade on an absolute total of accumulated flaws, per se, but rather what flaws are allowed in what grades, whether it's one "grade limiting" flaw or several.

To explain: foxing is a great example. Foxing is damaging to grades, but only at the very highest levels. Once you get down below 7-ish, foxing no longer affects the grade very much, if at all.

Tanning is the same way. A tan book that is otherwise a 9.4-9.6 can get knocked down to an 8.0 or 8.5 depending on severity...but that same tanning on a book that is otherwise a 6.0 isn't going to knock it down to a 3.5. It might knock it down to a 5.5. Maybe. And often not. So, if a book has the structure of a 6.0 AND has tanning AND has foxing AND has staining...those additional flaws aren't going to have much affect on the grade...generally.

This is why a book can have a WHOLLLLLLLE bunch of flaws at a certain level (like 8.0), and still be at that level because of a specific limiting flaw (a 1" CB corner crease, for example.) Many of the other "lesser flaws" are functionally "overlooked" because of that one limiting flaw. Granted, there is a limit (depending on the graders), but once you get down into certain grade ranges, additional flaws that would otherwise be allowed in HIGHER grades tend to not have as much, if any, effect on the grade. Whether that book ONLY has a 1" CB corner crease, or a 1" CB corner crease, slight interior tanning, a dime size light stain on the back cover, and a bunch of thumb dents...it's still an 8.0 either way.

That's probably not the best explanation, but I think the gist is clear.

(This, by the way, is what makes spotting pressable candidates in slabs is hard. You see a book with all sorts of flaws, pressable and unpressable, and you take out the pressable ones thinking it will improve the grade...but nope, because of the limiting flaws. I've had maybe 15-20 such books like that.)

[flashlites]

5 minutes ago, skypinkblu said:

Actually, I posted the correct scores to two friends this morning, but I posted the wrong scores (from notes on another round to Andy, yesterday)...hence the mix up.

I got 6 points, I'm more than happy. 

Very lucky! I graded my brains out on those last 2 and still only scored 6 points 

[WPPJames]

2 minutes ago, Crops068 said:

Ha, well Ruby loves everyone.  But is absolutely terrified of all other animal types.  Bunnies in the back yard, she runs from them.

Our dog  is afraid of any kind of "change". Probably gets that from me. Was walking him down the sidewalk one day and a neighbor had just placed a 8" tall ceramic lawn ornament bunny near the sidewalk. Dog freezes and then starts whining and pulls on his leash to go out into the middle of the street to avoid the killer bunny rabbit.

[RockMyAmadeus]

23 minutes ago, kav said:

26 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Agreed. It's never "all luck", and CGC graded these well.

funny how they grade well when you personally do well  

Oh no. They only grade well when you do poorly. 

[WPPJames]

2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That's probably not the best explanation, but I think the gist is clear.

That was incredibly helpful and informative . Already copied and pasted it into my notes for future reference.

[kav]

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Oh no. They only grade well when you do poorly. 

classy

[Crops068]

3 minutes ago, WPPJames said:

Our dog  is afraid of any kind of "change". Probably gets that from me. Was walking him down the sidewalk one day and a neighbor had just placed a 8" tall ceramic lawn ornament bunny near the sidewalk. Dog freezes and then starts whining and pulls on his leash to go out into the middle of the street to avoid the killer bunny rabbit.

Oh Ruby has what we call festi-phobia.  She is afraid of decorations.  She nearly took my arm off because of a flag flapping in the wind near a dog park once.  It was new and was only up for 4th of July.

Put up decorations in a room, she will stay in another room and give you the stink eye.  FOR HOURS.

Don't even THINK about bringing out a suitcase. Oh the looks you get from that one.

[adampasz]

8 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Something that might help people in the future: CGC grades on a "platform" basis, meaning that they don't grade on an absolute total of accumulated flaws, per se, but rather what flaws are allowed in what grades, whether it's one "grade limiting" flaw or several.

To explain: foxing is a great example. Foxing is damaging to grades, but only at the very highest levels. Once you get down below 7-ish, foxing no longer affects the grade very much, if at all.

Tanning is the same way. A tan book that is otherwise a 9.4-9.6 can get knocked down to an 8.0 or 8.5 depending on severity...but that same tanning on a book that is otherwise a 6.0 isn't going to knock it down to a 3.5. It might knock it down to a 5.5. Maybe. And often not. So, if a book has the structure of a 6.0 AND has tanning AND has foxing AND has staining...those additional flaws aren't going to have much affect on the grade...generally.

This is why a book can have a WHOLLLLLLLE bunch of flaws at a certain level (like 8.0), and still be at that level because of a specific limiting flaw (a 1" CB corner crease, for example.) Many of the other "lesser flaws" are functionally "overlooked" because of that one limiting flaw. Granted, there is a limit (depending on the graders), but once you get down into certain grade ranges, additional flaws that would otherwise be allowed in HIGHER grades tend to not have as much, if any, effect on the grade. Whether that book ONLY has a 1" CB corner crease, or a 1" CB corner crease, slight interior tanning, a dime size light stain on the back cover, and a bunch of thumb dents...it's still an 8.0 either way.

That's probably not the best explanation, but I think the gist is clear.

(This, by the way, is what makes spotting pressable candidates in slabs is hard. You see a book with all sorts of flaws, pressable and unpressable, and you take out the pressable ones thinking it will improve the grade...but nope, because of the limiting flaws. I've had maybe 15-20 such books like that.)

So in the case of Swamp Things vs. Fantastic Four, does this mean the tear on the right side of the FF puts it in a lower "platform" right out of the gate?

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, WPPJames said:

That was incredibly helpful and informative . Already copied and pasted it into my notes for future reference.

Thanks. It's not as eloquent as I would like, but I appreciate that it works for you

The HOS is a great example. It has the classic look of a "CGC Fine" range book....5.5-6.5. My initial reaction was 6.5, but after seeing the extent of the foxing, I went with 6.0. The foxing at that grade level doesn't really have an effect on the book that it would have if it was structurally a 9.4. In that case, yes, the foxing would probably have taken it down to a 7.0-7.5. But at the 6.0 range...not too much of an effect...and this is especially true of foxing and other more "natural" degradation, rather than stains, which ARE graded more harshly, depending on severity.

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 minutes ago, kav said:

8 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Oh no. They only grade well when you do poorly. 

classy

I promise I won't whine about it.

 

[speedcake]

Tears definitely immediately put a ceiling on a books grade, depending on the length of the tear.  Right off the bat.     stupid tears.

[Point Five]

8 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Something that might help people in the future: ...

Thanks! This is great thinking. Will have to mull this over a bit more.

Even with this in mind, it certainly seems like CGC has relaxed somewhat in the last year or so about some of the structural flaws that they used to hammer for.

And as an aside, they have always been weird on 'overlooking' foxing IMO    and I've never quite understood that.

 

[PeterPark]

That's interesting RMA. I know some dealers who grade on averages, like point values for tears and creases and folds and spine rolls, etc. and grade each aspect separately to come up with an average grade at the end. I get their rationale but the limiting method does make more sense to me. How can it be a fine if it has something only allowed in VG? At the same time, that makes some very appealing looking books technically lower grade.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 minute ago, adampasz said:

So in the case of Swamp Things vs. Fantastic Four, does this mean the tear on the right side of the FF puts it in a lower "platform" right out of the gate?

I imagine the biggest problem with the FF, in CGC's eyes, is the extensive creasing along the spine that breaks color. I imagine the book in hand is quite "soft" because of the multiple creases. When grading like CGC, the most important area is front cover at or near the spine, back cover at or near the spine, front cover corners, back cover corners, front cover edges, back cover edges, front cover interior space, back cover interior space. So, I don't think the tear/crease combo, as bad as it is, affected the grade "as much" as the wear at the spine and the overall "creasiness" of the cover in general.