Fun fact, carbon dating doesn’t work for objects after 1950 because of above ground nuclear testing.
14 Likes
And also this HQ has marks, just like any other it seems. So frustrating there is not a way to demonstrate anything
4 Likes
Latest reply from CGC (just now) looks like they will ask everyone to send the cards back to them. Website will be updated soon …
12 Likes
Verified another (thanks @pfm for doublechecking) legitimate Alpha card from the initial batch sold. It’s an Alpha Charizard which I received a scan from the owner who bought it via Nido before 2024.
I’ve blocked out the serials and such and highlighted the dots that were added (green) or missing (red). This pattern repeats across the card, so in areas where it was obscured by the print I used another grid to piece it together.
This Alpha Charizard was printed on July 10, 1997. This is one day before the 3 starters in this post:
32 Likes
There are companies that keep databases of dot patterns from different printers. Since CGC does a lot of paper authentication, maybe they have more info about the alpha dot patten.
15 Likes
First of all, thank you @pfm for doing this!
I have the Caterpie alpha playtest https://www.cgccards.com/certlookup/1401030937026/ (it’s actually Weedle but CGC mislabeled it). I bought it on Fanatics and had it sent to my PSA vault. Before I go through the whole process of figuring out how to see what printer dots it has, should the PSA vault scans be high quality enough to determine which dots it has? The front & back scans are 1470 × 2478 and seem to be high quality: Dropbox I’m well-versed in Photoshop so I’m sure I can figure it out, but there’s obviously a LOT of information to go through here.
Thank you to everyone who’s helping with this!
6 Likes
they’re accepting the fakes back for further review yet refuse to deactivate all the fake yugioh cards. nice.
4 Likes
I am guessing they will destroy any fakes returned to them?
3 Likes
More evidence connecting HQ beta to alpha playtest.
Reminder:
- Printer used for HQ beta doesn’t produce a dot pattern
- Printer used for Alpha playtest does
Alpha playtest Magneton is a weird card:
We expect the same Alpha dots on both front and back:
Front has no dots visible, back has alpha dots.
Looking at the back. Alpha playtest cards tend to look like this:
HQ beta cards tend to look like this:
Note the edges stand out more and there’s these striations
Zooming into HQ beta back focus on striations:
Again, the printer that produced this adds no dots.
Looking the alpha playtest Magneton.
Magneton appears to have no dots on the front and the same striations seen on HQ beta backs.
Magneton appears to have the alpha patterned back.
The evidence suggests the front possibly being printed on the same printer as HQ beta which ties together the timing of the cards with alpha dots and HQ beta even further.
thanks to @linkdu83 for the observation
26 Likes
I think I just discovered something important.
I’ll try to go in order but there are so many things to keep in mind and it may not be easy to keep up.
For all we know there are 2 totally different backs between the HQ and LQ betas.
One thing that never came back to me was the seemingly sharper quality of the LQs in fact we can see a more gradient color printing.
We then also discovered that the HQs on the back share the same dots as the alphas which we could not decode, this is because probably the back of the above is a scan of the alphas.
I did notice, however, that the alphas with these dots possess an identifiable backside compared to the LQ betas, something that initially turned my nose up at but now makes total sense.
Keep following me, another theory I had is that the new fake cards were printed from the original files, now according to this reasoning I would have confirmation.
The fake betas in fact have the same backs as the alphas because they were the only files available as far as the back is concerned, since precisely the back of the real betas was a scan, the file in fact never existed.
As evidence of this the backs of the alphas and the backs of the LQs are the same at the expense precisely of the code.
If they were printed together they would have the same codes, but that is not the case.
Edit: english as you can see is not my main language but i tried my best to be clear, alphas and hq are strongly bonded, if one is real is also the other. Imo these are real. If you have any question regarding what i wrote ask me I would be happy to explain more
15 Likes
Has Akabane said anything publicly yet or are the Nintendo ninjas keeping him quiet?
10 Likes
depends on how many there are. Of confirmed real cards there were only 12 of them brought over from retrox.
3 Likes
xiao said he did an interview which will solve all this nonsense. idk when or where it will release
5 Likes
How can you trust what Xiao says. His brain only cares if they come from Akabane and he says he didn’t make anymore. He doesn’t care when they were printed.
24 Likes
I don’t trust him, but as far as I know his reel was the last known image or appearance of akabane.
4 Likes
I had a Sandslash up on eBay, and just saw this in my email. I have already contacted Fanatics Collect and CGC for a refund.
34 Likes
Holy
4 Likes
I thought it was a good question. This was evident in yugiohs magic and wizards. The sets and tests didnt change at all.
4 Likes
Fanatics wont refund you. This is all cgc bud
5 Likes