So… if you jump on buyee and search “Top Sun Lizardon” you can find many many No Number Charizard proxies for sale… The real no number cards do not have a black border around the top pink rectangle (where it says the name of the pokemon) You can check any PSA copy and you will see the pink rectangle at the top does not have a thin black border. The borders were only on the numbered cards. BGS and SGC have been grading MANY fake no number charizards and one is now up for sale on HA… so this is an issue and if people could contact HA BGS and SGC and let them know… if not, the fake ones will flood the market and there will be many more graded fakes than real cards… the link to the HA auction is here comics.ha.com/itm/memorabilia/pokemon-charizard-no-number-blue-back-japanese-topsun-set-trading-card-topsun-1995-bgs-gem-mint-95/p/7277-107001.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515
4 Likes
yeah, pretty crazy how many fake copies have been graded. couple of relevant posts from ig:
https://instagram.com/p/CZvDu7_Pa3I
www.instagram.com/s/aGlnaGxpZ2h0OjE3OTMzNTU5OTcwOTQ4MjQz?story_media_id=2743853499126992244_45325924201
edit: Looks like the 9.5 copy on HA has finally been taken down?
Just received this today in the mail:
12 Likes
pfm
4
This card always seem to be the antithesis of “due diligence”
Meanwhile, some grader at BGS, probably:
“I guess we all got duped.”
13 Likes
@smpratte, this is the fake one then because it has the black border on the top?
Quuador
6
Out of curiosity: do we know for certain the ones with black borders are fakes? Aren’t there just two variants and both are legit?
This is the third time I’ve heard about the ones with a black border and bolder text being fakes (all three I’ve heard only within the last two months), but I have yet to see any evidence supporting this suggestion.
I’m not saying I don’t believe they are fake. I just like to see some evidence supporting this besides the “they are different, so one is fake”. In the TCG there are a lot of different variations that are still legit. The Japanese SM5+ (Ultra Force) set for example has cards with both black text and white-outlined text at the illustrator and set number, both are legit:
In the Base Set we see dozens of minor variations in all kind of categories, even though all are legit.
So just because one has a black border and a bit of bolder text on cards from 1997, doesn’t make me immediately think it’s fake without seeing some actual fake-checking evidence, like comparisons in Rosetta patterns; cores; thickness; blacklights; etc. etc. between two raw copies.
If there already is concrete evidence supporting this, could someone link that please?
Greetz,
Quuador
3 Likes
@quuador, It was alluded that the fakes matched fake cards sold on Yahoo Japan with some people successfully grading them. One thing I will point out is that the copyright font does match but does look smaller/bolder.
1 Like
rainbow
8
I am with @quuador that there should always be sufficient evidence. I’m yet to solidify a view.
The problem is these often appear for sale in bulk and have been around for a while. I’m not surprised they are being questioned.
None of the source images are flat scans which makes it difficult to do direct comparisons.
The fonts appear to be the same - albeit appearing slightly bolder, but again without the direct comparison it is hard to say. The comparisons in the instagram post aren’t ideal as they are misaligned and seemingly skewed.
What catches my eyes the most is the colours.
Charizard appears washed out and flushed red instead of the vibrant orange. This could be attributed to the camera, however it looks to be a little more than that, even if I was to colour correct.
For example when you look at the yellow text box in comparison to charizard’s flames.
The text on the back appears to be a little different too, thickness variances. At least to my source image overlays, which aren’t perfect.
Scott can check these queries about the fronts and backs since he has the one in question in his possession.
3 Likes
rainbow
10
I don’t think anyone here is advocating their authenticity. Instead everyone has been collecting the evidence to support a determination. Most of us don’t have a copy of the card in question to make a comparison.
The listings photos have terrible lighting, which was likely on purpose.
When checking cards for authenticity there are primary and secondary indicators.
Primary indicators are those you can identify remotely from images in order to disqualify or qualify authenticity.
These indicators are ideal because they can disqualify the card before going through the next stage of physically receiving the card, by which time the counterfeits have typically already been paid for.
Secondary indicators are those derivable when a prospective buyer has the chance to observe the characteristics of the card in question, up close and in person. This allows a user to check the card: finish, materials, rigidity, size, colours etc, for any anomalies.
Most of us here only had the primary indicators to work with and they were questionable.
It’s unfortunate that there is a strong headwind of counterfeits within non-tcg pokemon cards.
2 Likes
Quuador
11
Just to make it clear, I never said I thought it was authentic. I just hadn’t seen any evidence supporting it being not authentic besides the bolder font and black border before, which is mediocre at best.
If only NM Charizard has been seen with these black borders; bolder font; and matte non-reflective backs and none of the other Topsun cards, that’s indeed a much bigger indicator that they are most likely fake. So thanks a lot for sharing!
Greetz,
Quuador
2 Likes
