Corrispondenza tra codice corto e seriale (miniguida)

[lmviterbo]

U063 uploaded to EBTCheck until 2025-12-04 were:

flag U**241 - 1
flag U**245 - 4
flag U**246 - 2

There weren't any U060 uploaded yet at the time, but these were the U059:

flag U**248 - 2
flag U**249 - 3
flag U**250 - 1
flag U**256 - 6
flag U**259 - 2
flag U**263 - 1
flag U**274 - 1
flag U**277 - 3

The U050, on the other hand, were not any near that range (the first two may be errors):

flag U**018 - 1
flag U**050 - 1
flag U**091 - 1
flag U**092 - 16
flag U**093 - 81
flag U**094 - 116
flag U**095 - 44
flag U**096 - 23


In sum, I believe that your U060 U**246 is truly a U060, and you haven't made any error.

[marty44]

I have checked in EBTCheck "whole notes" table and found also nothing similar. Maybe we just need to wait some more months or there is some kind of a transposed digit error in the serial number.

[MDeen]

And to give an idea how... French the French are, shortcode determination for U :

For the shortcode, U..xxxyz... is the determination
xxx 010..029 shortcode U002
xxx 030 shortcode U003 when y is 0..5, U002 when y is 6..9
xxx 031..039 shortcode U002
xxx 040..059 shortcode U003
xxx 060 shortcode U004 when y is 0..8, U003 when y is 9

No, this does not repeat every 30 shortcodes because:

xxx 061..069 shortcode U003
xxx 070..089 shortcode U004
xxx 090 shortcode U005
xxx 091 shortcode U005 when y is 0..1, U004 when y is 2..9

No this is not some shift that keeps happening beause the double shortcode happens again for xxx 121, 151 and then 178, 198, 202.

Oh, and what about that z? That comes into play at xxx 211.
yz 00..01 is U011
yz 05..17 is U012
yz 20 U011
yz 23..24 U011
26..27 U011
28 U012
29..85 U011 (maybe I got fed up and this needs to be split up more)

Why Chamalieres, WHY!?!!?

why.jpg (18.11 KiB) Viewed 2178 times

I suspect U has similar arrangement because of the data I have, for U I'm not sure if I have enough data (notes) to determine this, but seeing that there is no linear xxx -> shortcode relation, it probably is.

[lmviterbo]

Below is the currently known distribution of S/S banknotes by signature. All the help to fill the gaps will be greatly appreciated. (This chart is valid for all banknotes of all plates.)

2S_50_distrib_20260121(GP).png (22.85 KiB) Viewed 2027 times

As most EBTors probably know by now, the plates S036, S037 and S041 were issued under two signatures: MD (Mario Draghi) and CL (Christine Lagarde).

I have been updating this post for almost 5 years now (so it's now back on the current thread's page 26), which is basically a list of serial numbers from S**65 to S**90 (the range where these three double-faced plates appear), with an indication of whether its signature is MD or CL. Almost 100 sources have been used for this list, including more than 1000 combos reported here or via pm by many fellow EBTors.

Now, it's time for me to stop updating that list — but not to stop my research (just simpliify it)!

Here's a glimpse of the huge list (in table format) on that post. This is only the beginning and the last row:

≤ S**6541	≤ S035	MD	(several sources)
S**6544	S041	MD	(Seltaeb, @ EBT Forum)
S**6545	S041	MD	(mistercesare, @ EBT Forum)
S**6546	S034	MD	(lmviterbo, @ EuroBillTracker)
S**6547	S034	MD	(lmviterbo, @ EuroBillTracker)
S**6548	S041	MD	(Bryce, @ EBT Forum)
S**6551	S041	MD	(mancuso, @ Delcampe)
S**6558	S036	MD	(enotes, @ Eurotracer)
S**6565	S036	MD	(lmviterbo, @ EuroBillTracker)
S**6566	S036	MD	(only5678, @ eBay)
S**6567	S036	MD	(MARIUS-FFB, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6568	S036	MD	(philgelico, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6569	S036	MD	(MARIUS-FFB, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6570	S036	MD	(nebenbahner, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6574	S041	MD	(lmviterbo, @ EuroBillTracker)
S**6575	S041	MD	(lmviterbo, @ EuroBillTracker)
S**6576	S034	MD	(mico, @ EBT Forum)
S**6577	S034	MD	(mico, @ EBT Forum)
S**6578	S036	MD	(mico, @ EBT Forum)
S**6579	S041	MD	(ruspa, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6580	S041	MD	(sabaudo82, @ Delcampe)
S**6581	S041	MD	(beaweb, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6582	S036	MD	(Sky, @ EBT Forum)
S**6585	S041	MD	(Bryce, @ EBT Forum)
S**6586	S041	MD	(lmviterbo, @ EuroBillTracker)
S**6587	S041	MD	(Bryce, @ EBT Forum)
S**6588	S036	MD	(Franz, @ Eurotracer)
S**6589	S036	MD	(trinacria, @ EBT Forum)
S**6591	S036	MD	(MARIUS-FFB, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6592	S036	MD	(beaweb, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6593	S036	MD	(Seltaeb, @ EBT Forum)
S**6595	S036	MD	(lmviterbo, @ EuroBillTracker)
S**6596	S036	MD	(MARIUS-FFB, @ EBT Forum pm)
S**6597	S036	MD	(lmviterbo, @ EuroBillTracker)
S**6600	S036	MD	(Sky, @ EBT Forum)
[…]
≥ S**9051	S038—S040, S046, S048—S050	CL	(several sources)

In fact, that table reached its limit with 1250 rows, and it will become unformatted if I keep adding more rows. On the other hand, already back in 2021 I have arrived to the conclusion that the MD/CL distribution is actually quite simple (even if the plate distribution is extremely complex). I will keep on registering every new combo on my personal Excel table (with over 2400 notes), in hope of one day finally being able to pinpoint where the exact transictions between signatures lie.

So please keep sending me your findings in any way you wish. I'm interested in the serial numbers and signatures all S036, S037 and S041 notes.

If you want to help without thinking too much, the following is much easier to remember: all notes with serial number ≥ S**65.

If, on the other hand, you just want to give me combos that are relevant for this research, please check the chart above, or if you prefer take notice of the transitions I still must fill in:

S**667 & S**668
S**674
S**699 & S**700
S**785
S**789
S**799 & S**800
S**827

[LArdennais]

Da parte mia / From me :

S**6549 S041 MD
S**6550 S041 MD
S**6559 S041 MD
S**6573 S041 MD
S**6608 S036 MD
S**6618 S041 MD
S**6625 S041 MD
S**6634 S036 MD
S**6638 S036 MD
S**6642 S037 MD
S**6646 S041 MD
S**6658 S036 MD
S**6667 S037 MD
S**6690 S036 MD
S**6694 S037 MD
S**6715 S037 MD
S**6748 S037 CL
S**6885 S037 MD
S**7733 S035 MD
S**7737 S041 MD
S**7741 S034 MD
S**7743 S035 MD
S**7745 S041 MD
S**7746 S041 MD
S**775 to 778 S041 MD
S**7792 S034 MD
S**7810 S036 MD
S**7907 S041 CL
S**8106 S041 MD
S**8108 S036 MD
S**8111 S036 MD
S**8112 S036 MD
S**8113 S041 MD
S**81230 to 81235 S034 MD
S**81237 S041 MD
S**8147 and 8148 S041 MD
S**8169 S036 MD
S**824x S037 MD
S**8253 to 8256 S037 MD
S**8257 S041 MD
S**8258 S037 MD
S**8275 S041 CL

S**8325 S037 CL
S**8332 S041 CL
S**8394 S037 CL
S**8448 S036 CL
S**8450 S037 CL
S**8476 S036 CL

[lmviterbo]

Grazie / Thanks for caring, LArdennais!

I suspect you are taking that information not from your personal logs but from EBTCheck's Notes Explorer tool.

This tool is great but the signatures are an educated guess (or in this case not that much educated). In fact, Marty (EBTCheck's developer) uses my own information to establish which ranges are (or "should be") MD or CL. If my information is incomplete, the systems has a system to "guess" which should be the signature. This system fails at times; both Marty and I know it, but it's not easy to fix.

All this to say that your S**6885 / S037 is in fact very very likely CL.

Unless you have some photo evidence of the contrary, I will assume that that being shown as MD is simply an EBTCheck mistake.

[LArdennais]

Grazie / Thanks for caring, LArdennais!

I suspect you are taking that information not from your personal logs but from EBTCheck's Notes Explorer tool.

(...)

All this to say that your S**6885 / S037 is in fact very very likely CL.

Unless you have some photo evidence of the contrary, I will assume that that being shown as MD is simply an EBTCheck mistake.

Absolutely not ! These informations come from MY personal Access-database created from EBT-csv files.

(...)

I have introduced this note on February 2025, so...I have no picture of this one. And according to e...tr...cer stats, only 8 S / S??68*-notes introduced - all with CL-signature...except one. So, I also think that "my" note is also signed by C. Lagarde.

[lmviterbo]

These informations come from MY personal Access-database created from EBT-csv files.

I have introduced this note on February 2025, so...I have no picture of this one. And according to e...tr...cer stats, only 8 S / S??68*-notes introduced - all with CL-signature...except one. So, I also think that "my" note is also signed by C. Lagarde.

Oh, I'm glad you are not relying on EBTCheck for this. And thanks again for caring.

Without a photo proof, the most likely explanation is, still, that you made a mistake when taking note of the signature, and I'll detail why.

The ET user who entered that "MD" note you mention (Royal King) made a mistake when copying the data he found on Delcampe. I don't know him but I suspect he is a researcher who enters Delcampe notes on ET, because at a certain point in 2021 I noticed that Royal King registered at ET a lot of notes that appeared for sale.

This particular note was in fact for sale by Delcampe's user "allnotes". The note was sold in 2022-03-08 but I saved the link to that sale, which is still accessible. That page shows a picture of the note. It's the same note that Royal King entered at ET (exact same number until the end), and it's signed Lagarde, not Draghi.

Furthermore, all 124 notes I know in the so-called charge 68 (S??68) are in fact demonstrably CL (yes, I have proof of all of them). Also: EBTCheck's database has 126 notes in the range S**68822 to S**68917, all of them S037. I don't know the signature on most of them, but I know some, and it would be really a huge surprise if there was some isolated MD within the same numeric range where everything else is CL. In particular, I know S**6883 and S**6887 that are CL. There are 9 S**6885 at EBTCheck (including yours) but none of them has the signature in the comments.

In sum: you should consider the possibility of having made a mistake, because it is the most likely explanation (think Occam's Razor).

[LArdennais]

Oh, I'm glad you are not relying on EBTCheck for this. And thanks again for caring.

Without a photo proof, the most likely explanation is, still, that you made a mistake when taking note of the signature.

(...)
In sum: you should consider the possibility of having made a mistake, because it is the most likely explanation (think Occam's Razor).

When I do researches from "my" notes, I only use "my" own database, nothing else !

And, I repeat : I have probably made a signature's mistake when entering this note. And I can add this (recently found) : S**6844 S036 CL . But if I will found again a S**688, I will check the signature.

[lmviterbo]

Thanks again, LArdennais!

I had actually misread your sentence, and I thought you were insisting that your note must be MD.

I'm glad you wrote back and I re-read your previous message. And I'm glad we're on the same page.

Thanks again for the careful research of your notes. It really helps to have confirmation of all those notes.

[lmviterbo]

Grazie a EBTCheck, tutto questo è diventato molto più agevole.

1L_020_E-L307580-L307678.png (61.74 KiB) Viewed 827 times

1L_020_E-L307679-L307800.png (59.34 KiB) Viewed 827 times

1L_020_E-L3078010-L3078393.png (67.76 KiB) Viewed 827 times

1L_020_E-L3078394-L3078473.png (29.14 KiB) Viewed 827 times

1L_020_E-L3081970-L3082586.png (50.83 KiB) Viewed 827 times

Non esitate a chiedermi aiuto per eventuali lacune da colmare.

[mico]

ieri ho tracciato un Y008I4 / YA7435

oggi mi viene il dubbio che sia un pezzo da perché con il corto Y008I4 ho inserito solo pezzi da YA7

secondo voi questa banconota è un oppure un

[-flop-]

ieri ho tracciato un Y008I4 / YA7435

oggi mi viene il dubbio che sia un pezzo da perché con il corto Y008I4 ho inserito solo pezzi da YA7

secondo voi questa banconota è un oppure un

Io con quel codice corto ho 11 e 2 .
Questi ultimi però sono YA53 e YA55, mentre i sono tutti compresi fra YA66 e YA78.

[mico]

ieri ho tracciato un Y008I4 / YA7435

oggi mi viene il dubbio che sia un pezzo da perché con il corto Y008I4 ho inserito solo pezzi da YA7

secondo voi questa banconota è un oppure un

Io con quel codice corto ho 11 e 2 .
Questi ultimi però sono YA53 e YA55, mentre i sono tutti compresi fra YA66 e YA78.

grazie del riscontro -flop-

ho verificato nel mio database ed in effetti è proprio come dici tu
vado a correggere. Grazie

[MDeen]

I got some E008H4 EA8309 notes. The first I find in marty's database (no EA83 notes in there, also no EA80, EA81 and just 1 EA82) and the shortcode does not match with the standard calculation.
From the data I have, the calculation works until EA75, then does not work for EA76-EA79 and then works again for EA84 and onward.

The calculation looks to be based on the first 4 digits divided by 4.

And EA825 and EA830 are different again.