Ex Dragon
There are two points of interest to cover for this set. The first is the fact that for the first print run, one of the reverses (TV Reporter) was omitted from the print sheet. For the second print run (according to some accounts, the print run intended for distribution outside the US), it was included. The second is that this set, while it generally has the same rarity set-up as the previous two, has three secret rares: Charmander, Charmeleon and Charizard - the rarity of which needs to be discussed.
As far as Youtube videos go, I was only able to find three videos of complete box openings. In this sense, it is one of the two worst-documented sets around, the other being Ex Team Magma vs Team Aqua. In the small sample, two boxes contained one secret rare each, and one contained two. This overall rarity of about 1.33 secret rares per box is consistent with what was written in old threads on the PokéGym, namely that the secret rares had about the same rarity as the other holos:
- Do u get only one of charmander, charmelon, or charizard in Dragon set one per box? | The PokeGym
- The So called secret rare | The PokeGym
In my “best guess” model, I am assuming H7 rarity for all three of them (the other holos being either H7 or H8) due to my gut feeling, even if H8 rarity would actually better fit the (very small) sample data:
7 appearances * 3 secret rares / 110 cards on sheet * 6 holos per box = 1.145 secret rares per box
8 appearances * 3 secret rares / 110 cards on sheet * 6 holos per box = 1.309 secret rares per box
These things said, here are the rarity tables:
Reverse TV reporter is a RE0 card in the first print run, meaning it wasn’t on the sheet. It is worth noting how incredibly common the non-holo rares actually are - this comes from the fact that there are only 10 of them and there is one in every pack.
The raw data for the holos, rares and Pokémon-ex (with the dashed lines denoting where the transitions from H8 to H7, R13 to R12 and EX13 to EX12 would occur) is given below, though it is basically meaningless due to the small sample size:
For the reverses, the same sample yielded 11% reverse rare holos, 11% reverse rares, 29% reverse uncommons and 49% reverse commons. This would fit very well with the 23 RE2 cards being commons (expected distribution: 11% reverse rare holos, 9% reverse rares, 29% reverse uncommons and 51% reverse commons).
I did not look at the commons and uncommons.