Can you post your findings with PSA since you say they caught it?
Their decision to not grade these was based on the fact that they could not be reliably authenticated. This is what they caught. Edit to say this was apparent to everyone who had been involved in any real authentication work in their lives.
Look, i know it seems that way, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel since some are showing 1996. That means we shouldnât discount the market.
When the Magic & Wizards forgeries came out in my hobby and ruined (and I mean ruined) the viability of the Magic & Wizards market in Yugioh - just like this - I worked hard to provide a path for people to collect them in confidence. It is still very slowly working but it is improving. One real copy recently sold for 1K, which is laughably big money in Yugioh right now lol.
Even once the dust settles, and CGC does what it will or wonât do, and we know for sure that there are forgeries, there will need to be an easier guide other than this dot test to determine authenticity. Nobody is going to do this test on ebay auctions.
Even after that, there will still be shit ebay consigners who are morally ambivalent - like some people on this thread - who will sell whatever they consign despite the fact that it pollutes the hobby. While people should take serious umbrage with that, it should be expected. Some people have no sense of justice and werenât raised right.
The only way that I have found to get around this is to constantly remind people of what is real and what is not. Continue to reinforce the data and stick to the facts so that the truth is really just data and not opinion. If this works (as Iâve said), controls can be established and perhaps an easier way forward can be created to help people identify forgeries without using invasive or technologically intense tests.
Ok so you went from âThey caught thisâ to âcould not reliably be authenticatedâ.
I cannot speak for PSA but I do know some companies will not grade certain prototypes or mock ups. It is not because they have decided they are fake, they just do not have the full knowledge of authenticating and even more so the issues that may arise afterwards if they were wrong.
PSA caught/knew/understood/saw (pick the language you want) that these cards lacked a reliable path forward and could be forgeries. They posed a risk. Again, they caught this when CGC apparently did not. So, I donât know what your arguing about here. The results of this are 550 posts deep right now. PSA caught it and CGC didnât.
Edit to say that this isnât my opinion⌠There were discussions about this at PSA. PSA takes these requests for holdering seriously and they want to do right by the hobby. If nothing else, people with huge stakes in the Pokemon submission market wanted this. It was seriously considered. I was only part of some side bars but never any discussions in house. My work on Yugioh forgeries made discussions with me helpful (I presume). In my discussions I (and others) identified Akabane as the sole source of authenticity. His word would be the only way to authenticate. And it is clear that this is true as has been posted already. It has been said that CGC was only asking for provenance in some instances and if true, it is hard to deny that this has caused some issues. Provenance is just a claim. It isnât really data unless it can be connect directly to PKMN, who said (at least) some of these are fakes.
By submitting a claim, you agree to the exclusive remedies provided by CGC and waive rights to seek further compensation or litigation.
You emulated illustrating software from the 90s!? How do I get on your level!!? Awesome.
YeahâŚ. No way in hell Iâm sending CGC my card without a written statement on the current findings, what happened on their end, and what a proper remediation will be. Iâm not trusting a level 1 or level 2 support analyst for advice on this. Iâm going to be patient and weather the storm until clear paths are presented.
I have this thing where people make statements out of the blue and have nothing to back them up. Thatâs the issue
But it shows July 96. for cards advertised as March playtests.
What do you want me to tell you. PSA caught this at the easiest level. It was not hard to discern that these posed serious risks and problems. They didnt even need to do a dot test to know this. It was known well before it got to this point.
I have this thing where people make statements out of the blue and have nothing to back them up. Thatâs the issue
The feeling is mutual.
I canât believe PSA didnât catch this.
Thats why the didnt grade them.
If you canât get a higher-resolution scan, extreme closeups with bright lighting may help.
People are going to deny this. This is only the beginning. There are some people on here who sold Magic & Wizards forgeries even after I proved they were fakes. Donât be surprised when they ignore this and start consigning them again.
its kinda weird how they only had 3 beta presentations at first which are the correct ones coz the come from the magazines and then all of a sudden they started calling all of the previous alphas betas 
idk what kinda racket that is ciz the alphas are way different 
Youâre speaking over each other. @GhezziTCG you are saying they âcaught thisâ which could interpreted as if they caught the dot pattern and knew not to grade these (which as far as Iâm aware wasnât what happened). What I understand you are trying to say was they made a choice not to slab these based on the amount of evidence or lack thereof that existed at the time.
Why are they called march playtests if they were printed in July?
my ranked teammates 