Hi, this is a condensed repost of info I took off because GP's list was not in line with it when I spoke to him at initial posting date about amonth ago.
HE HAS SINCE MADE THE CHANGE to his list, to comply with the FACTUAL layout and printing of the $10 sheets. This was after further review of
a) the data I sent him, and
b) reviewing his data and note stock.
(This applies to BEY, which I will post about in the appropriate place).
NOTE: THE LIST HAS BEEN MAILED OUT WITHOUT THE CORRECTIONS. THIS IS BEING DEALT WITH AS I TYPE.
Gilles has given the "OKAY" for me to go on with this, despite this situation.
A condensed version of the original post is as follows:
**************
BEY3.5M (ish) (Update: Starting from ream 2 of BEY 2005: 2580000)
right through to the end of BEZ are compliant with the discovered BABN "Standard Matrix" (shown in BlackBoxMystery-01)
At first look, I didn't take into account the changeover point, which actually staggers the notes out of line by 20,000. If this was ignored, then the 21st position of the BABN $5 Standard Matrix would have been the FIRST position of the BABN $10 Matrix. Update: We know this proposition has been logicallyrules out from what we know about the Standard Matrix. But to continue with that pattern, you would have seen that
BABN $5 row "A" became the BABN $10 row "E"
BABN $5 row "B" became the BABN $10 row "F"
BABN $5 row "C" became the BABN $10 row "G"
BABN $5 row "D" became the BABN $10 row "H"
BABN $5 row "E" became the BABN $10 row "A"
BABN $5 row "F" became the BABN $10 row "B"
BABN $5 row "G" became the BABN $10 row "C"
BABN $5 row "H" became the BABN $10 row "D"
This is what I Suspected (at first)...
The residual Miniature Matrix (5 notes per sheet) still exists (evidence shows this)...
The big question is this: how on earth could this be if the mini-matrix is sheared off the bottom?
The pattern in the BABN $5s showed that the mini-matrix came off either the top or the bottom of the sheet. One row- sheared right off. However, if the tens actually are the way I describe above (Update: We know they are not), then this mini-ream cannot work. There is a staggering by 20,000, putting the row "G" somewhere in MID MATRIX, which means that the next row could not possibly be sheared off, because it is MID SHEET. So this confirms that the above row inversion theory is logically impossible. (Update: This conclusion also supported by collected note data)
UPDATE: Ream 2 of BEY 2005 confirms a 20,00 staggering from typical ream starting position, therefore confirming the "Standard Matrix" as showin in BlackBoxMystery-01. Thank Goodness!
[size=18]Here is the exciting part[/size]- when they are shearing off the residual row of 5 notes, we do not know how long they store them before they print on them. The residual FP and BP combinations are:
70/70
96/84
85/90
68/63
74/56
I have NOT found ANY of these combinations in BEY 2005 as of yet.
If in fact they do not exist (printed), then that means:
They are were set aside until later - already when printing the next prefix.
If you find any of these combinations in BEY 2005, I would suggest keeping them - at least for now.
UPDATE: One member has found 3 samples, all from different areas of BEY 2005.
As described, the mini-reams have been found in large clusters so far. At this time, I am conducting a rather large study (involving 1500 "Standard" reams over 6 prefixes) to determine the placement or absence of these mini reams in a prefix. UPDATE: I am going to need help with this part of the study
For example, suppose it was found that only ONE group of eight Mini-reams went through on a prefix. This would be the minimum.
IF that was the case, then you would have in one prefix, only
8000 notes that are 70/70
8000 notes that are 96/84
8000 notes that are 85/90
8000 notes that are 68/73
8000 notes that are 74/56
Those ranges are smaller than any sheet replacement range by 80%.
These would be very hard to get because instead of being able to find some in every brick, like the case with a sheet replacement, there would be only a small number of bricks at all with these notes. These notes would not be found in any other brick, and if they were found by a brick hunter in a full brick, they would have to be recognized and saved by the searcher - however, the significance of the notes would not be understood until nearly the entire prefix is mapped out.
Back to the layout of the sheets... the BABN $10 layout holds true from BEY 2005 (Ream 2) right up to the ream containing
BEZ 9755438 81/66 -- showing up in the correct position.
The last note in this ream of 40,000 would be BEZ 9,779,999
Following that, the next recorded not in sequential order is:
BEZ 9820654 70/70 (part of a Mini-ream). Note how this is A1.
Since these mini reams are suspect to be in groups of 8, the grouping totals 40,000 notes.
The ream prior to this one above, is unnacounted for:
BEZ 9,780,000 - 9,819,999 (40,000)
According to the notes recorded, the next printing groups are groupings of 8 mini-reams placed together. BEZ:
9,820,000 - 9,859,999
9,860,000 - 9,899,999
9,900,000 - 9,939,999
9,940,000 - 9,979,999
However,9,980,000 - 9,999,999 is a section of 20,000 notes. (And has no samples found).
This particular run could be:
a) not printed
b) printed on Mini-reams, 4 rows by 1000 skip
c) regular group of notes, skip-500.
In any case, it changes nothing.
But speaking to the notes prior, you can see,
BEZ 9820654 70/70
BEZ 9823662 68/63
BEZ 9836125 96/84
BEZ 9869291 74/56
BEZ 9895056 70/70
are notes from these mini-reams, and they fit perfectly according to the printing process described.
The 20,000 staggering at the start of the ream is not evident in BTA onwards, making it much easier (in fact exactly EXACTLY) like the Standard Matrix from BlackBoxMystery-01, with position A1 starting at serial number 0000000.
Stepping back: One more proof that the Mini-Ream is shaved off the bottom of the sheet.
BEU:
Ream 1:
Skip-5000, all 45 positions used. The numbers of this ream in combination with the pattern of numbers from the first few positions of the next ream prove that the mini-reams are in fact from the bottom of the sheet.
Ream 2:
So far evidence of skip 25,000 for some parts of a single ream, notes skipped, and skip-changing, all in one ream.
To end it there, the BEU to the end of 2004 BEY are very different. Not getting into detail at this time.
However, sharing two prefixes on one sheet hasbeen done before:
BEW 9997718 85/90
BEY 0000147 85/90
Even though they are from different sheets, you know that positions prior to 85/90 on the sheet with BEY 0000147 would show a BEW prefix, because of the skip numbering.
Here is what I firmly believe is happening... from my data and research. (for BABN notes)
1) BABN replacements prior to the current skip-1000 pattern (Ream 2 of BEY 2005 and forward) are single note replacements (as opposed to sheet replacements).
2) All BABN notes are converging to the skip-1000 pattern on the Standard Matrix I discovered with the BABN $5s. The $10s in BEY Ream 2 of BEY (2580000), the $20s in ALB 2-4M range, and $50s and $100s, not sure exactly....... Each denom having finds from their respective "mini-reams" as well. THIS IS THE LASTEST REPORT BEING SENT TO GILLES.
Canadian Paper Money
