Why do you get a Holo in every pack for almost all Japanese old sets. While English is 1 in 3 packs? Is it because the Japanese people would be in outrage to be disappointed in the majority of packs? 
Would they cause a riot if this happened in Japan? Do we just get screwed because itās America? Most of what I said was jokes but in all seriousness why do we get screwed on pull rates. Modern pull rates are the ultimate sham. 34 trash bulk packs 1 or 2 decent ones. And usually your best pack contains a $10 cardā¦ Tell me your thoughts on why Japanese packs have better pull rates and why ours are so shitty
3 Likes
I donāt know why the English and Japanese management teams diverged from each other in determining the holo pull rate, but what I can tell you is that the English holo pull āscheduleā is in line with what psychologists have determined creates the highest level of response rates in humans. That is, a ārewardā, in this case a holo pull, is delivered after a variable number of āresponsesā (pack openings) - in this case, on average 1 in 3. This means that itās possible to pull 2 holos in 3 packs if youāre lucky or no holos in 3 packs if youāre unlucky. This has been shown to produce higher and more steady response rates compared to other reinforcement schedules like a fixed ratio reward schedule, which would instead provide a guaranteed holo in every 3rd pack. The Japanese āone holo per packā removes an element of variability in the reward schedule and therefore would probably lead to less response behaviour than the English pull rate (i.e. the only variability would be the quality of the holo pulled rather than getting a holo vs. a non-holo). The variable ratio reward schedule used in English Pokemon cards is actually quite similar to slot machines and other forms of gambling.
12 Likes
Because they arenāt greedy
2 Likes
This could be the answer. Maybe they donāt want to get their youth into gambling.
2 Likes
So basically they make the majority of packs bad just so when you finally get a good pack it creates more excitement? The main thing that confuses me is how they didnāt do the same pull rates world wide
I was actually just reading an hour or two ago that for the old WOTC sets, WOTC decided to add non-holo versions of the holo rares so that they could make sure you donāt get a holo in every pack. This also allowed their sets to become larger, making people need to buy more packs to potentially collect a full set, and making them more money. I canāt comment on the sets after that since I never opened them, but I guess they kept the same formula.
1 Like
Ya it pretty much stems down to Pokemon company in America is just too greedy. Whenever you get time look into modern pull rates. We thought it was bad years agoā¦ Itās continued to get worse. We would have the same population of cards if they simply printed a third of what they did. No one would complain because I donāt see many people in a craze over finding light packs. Unless they are collecting just pack arts or want to grade the pack. No one wants to open a pack worth hundreds to find all bulk cards. And for the most part weighing packs never would have been a thing. So buying packs online in singles would be a lot less sketchy. Now itās almost garenteed light unless youāre paying that heavy premium
1 Like
Anyone know if the ex series in Japanese also have a holo per pack?
1 Like
bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/List_of_Pok%C3%A9mon_Trading_Card_Game_expansions
This shows the different sets with the total cards in EN and JP. You can check each set but I would assume that since you get 1 rare per pack that it means a good chance at a holo since they have a majority being holo rares. I could be wrong though since I didnāt check each set list.
1 Like
It wasnāt that way for all of the old Japanese sets, at least in one instance that Iām aware of. You typically get one holo for every 5 packs of the 1997 Scratch Cards by Tomy. (That is 3 per box, or about 1 in 25 cards). Of course that was non-TCG, soā¦
1 Like
For Japan it was all about getting into the game so why cut chances short for making a deck more expensive to make? This emphasis on playing the game is of course emphasized well with the inclusion of trophies from tournaments before Englishās competitive beginning.
English had a larger ground to plant resources with starting later and being able to slowly expand (ie catch up) with referencing set releases. Englishās business agenda was rooted from being branched alongside MTG but also was able to stretch out further having more accessibility through more media then did Japanese which is more akin to the equal real-time growth expansion familiar today. And obviously in its big bang is the population difference to meet the demand.
1 Like
Personally Iām glad our older sets didnāt give in to a holo in every pack. That would create a lot less rarity in the cards and especially chase cards, which would make them a lot less collectible and valuable.
1 Like
I admire that Japan went this route more now for it working as an entry-level to a certain desired holofoil in whatever other language and that if you want the higher challenge, you all know where to go from No Rarity/ Chinese Base Set, Secret Rares and promos etc.
1 Like
Iām not. I have ethical issues with fabricated rarity for the sake of profit. It makes sense to make 1 holo per pack because ārarityā is built into the mechanic. But putting in ānon-holosā was a big FU to a lot of people and started a lot of other ethical concerns - weighted packs being one of them. I think, monetarily, sure, things wouldnāt be as āvaluableā money wise, but I donāt think that would have stopped people being collectors.
2 Likes
Thereās nothing unethical about creating a product and selling it the way that it is stated. The fact that people in the secondary market manipulate a good product for their own unethical reasons isnāt a fault of the pokemon company, this happens in every industry and market. The point of their product was induce a chase after rare cards and it served its purpose, people misusing a good product doesnāt change that the product is good and ethically created.
1 Like
Mind you have any standalone highest point set rarity cards have ever been viable for double demand? Crystalshiningstars? Legends at a push?
?
1 Like
When I say I have āethical issuesā, please note that I donāt believe these are high on the hierarchy of ethical concerns. This is more on the scale of being more ethical than taking two smarties from your friendās candy wrapper when they said you could only have one.
Someone inform me if Iām wrong, but Japan set the standard for rarity with their product in terms of holos and non-holos (aka, rares are holo and thereās a holo rare in every pack). English sets did not meet that standard - nevermind maintaining the standard for even card quality. I should have stated āled to other ethical concernsā. Iāll agree that the English prints probably didnāt intend for the issue of weighed cards, but trying to get more profit for less product (getting a non-holo but still saying itās ārareā is drivel), is pretty scummy. We have issue with āRandom lots with CHANCE of Ultra Rareā listings on ebay for the same reason - it drives a synthetic market that gives no guarantee unless you can afford boxes instead of packs.
If I buy a hot dog, for example, I shouldnāt have to buy two for a CHANCE of getting mustard.
Long story short. I just think itās bullshit that English packs donāt guarantee a holo rare nor hold up to the same standard of card quality as Japan. Itās why we see inflated card prices for English sets just because of āconditionā when, in all seriousness, there are Japanese cards out in the world that are actually more RARE in quantity that are monetarily worth less.
Increase card quality, make holo rares the norm in English packs = more accessibility for more collectors. Chase cards exist purely in this state because you might not get the RARE you wanted. Win/Win.
ā¦
Well, unless youāre a flipper.
1 Like
So a few problems with your statements. You cannot compare āRandom lots with CHANCE of Ultra Rareā listings to selling factory sealed packs by a large corporation. A seller on ebay directly benefits from manipulating what cards are given to the buyer because they sell each card on the secondary market and maintain a higher profit margin by giving you worse cards, that is why those listings are shady and scummy. The Pokemon company doesnt benefit more when they sell a pack with a holo charizard or a holo muk or no holo inside because they are getting the same payment on the pack regardless of what the buyer pulls.
The hot dog comparison makes no sense. Everyone buying pokemon packs is looking for SOME level of risk, some are riskier than others. Nobody goes to buy a pokemon card pack knowing EXACTLY what is inside, but everyone buying food, in this case a hot dog, expects to know exactly what food they are buying and what is in or on the food.
Thereās nothing wrong with English packs not guaranteeing a holo, as you can see by the market they have been very successful in doing so. This has been the pattern of success in many other TCGs as well like Yugioh, Magic (I believe), and even sports many times do not guarantee an autograph or a āHolo Rareā (Holo Rareās in sports are obviously different just using pokemon lingo). The point is everyone has accepted these risks and continue to buy them. Thereās nothing wrong with doing it this way just because it is not your preference.
Correct but it would also be the same population if they simply printed a third less. It would actually make the Commons uncommons rares slightly more desirable because that would be the main thing effected with population decrease if that makes sense. Or they could have sold slightly cheaper 12 pack basically elite trainer type boxes. The other 24 bulk packs are unnecessary. It is what it is at the end of the day. When I originally made this thread the curiosity in the thought process of all the bulk packs is what got me thinking about pull rates.