[general discussion] How did I lose?

[Roat17]

Do you often find yourself wondering this very question after absolutely dominating almost every aspect of a certain game?  Has there been one card you consistantly play against that people use and are able to pull a win out of a hat so to speak?  Many people I'm sure can attest to losing because of a top deck, but which top deck in general terms get's things done?

My playgroup always notes that when playing with blue, playing ancestral and either time walk (in aggro) or tinker (in control) let you win games that you really had no business winning.  The same can be said for Y Will, or possibly a tutor.  I can't really think of a green card that offers anywhere near the power of any of the above cards, except for regrowth, but even then it's a lesser Y.Will.  Balance is obviously a beast for white, as is swords to deal with those damned akroma/dsc that run wild.  Red?  Maybe a bolt, or perhaps wheel of fortune?

Anyways, I want to know basically which cards the community on TMD sees as almost auto-inclusions in a deck that supports the colours (aside from A. Recall, as this is to the best of my knowledge the only card that is played in EVERY deck packing blue).

[diopter]

Without question, Yawgmoth's Will. That card singlehandedly produces the most unfair comebacks nearly every time it is cast in a losing position.

[UR]

Stop blaiming it on single cards and/or bad luck. About 99% of the times you lose, you made more mistakes than your opponent and it cost you the game. Simple as that. I've yet to see anybody play this game perfectly so chances are you screwed up somewhere along the line... you may not see it, but that doesn't mean you didn't screw up.

[TheAlpha]

I could mention a lot of obvious cards but I think Chain of Vapor is really underrated, I would run it in almost every deck that supports blue, it's such an awesome card

[Kowal]

I think historically, the card that I've been beaten with off the topdeck the most is Hurkyl's Recall.  It wrecked me when I played stax, it wrecked me when I played Chalice Blue, and it even caught me with my pants down when I played Gifts and CS a few times.

My first experience getting rolled with it was playing Welder MUD like four years ago against Samite Healer's Keeper.

[andrewpate]

About 99% of the times you lose, you made more mistakes than your opponent and it cost you the game. Simple as that.

I disagree strongly.  I get manascrewed or manaflooded a lot more than 1 game in 100.  Add to that the number of times I've been crushed by a god draw against which I had no chance to win, the number of times my Limited opponent has drawn his bomb 2 games in a row while I couldn't find mine, the number of times I've made a statistically correct play only to have my opponent draw the one card he needed..... the game involves luck.  Period.  That, along with the lack of shared absolute information, is what separates it from chess.  And that's not even taking into account the luck of getting paired against a terrible matchup in which you have strategic inferiority.  I would say that no more than three quarters of my losses are due to misplays, in general.

That said, I do think that rating a card in terms of its ability to steal games via topdeck is a flawed system.  This valuation method is an easy trap into which one might fall, since having a game stolen by a lone topdeck is usually quite memorable.  Often, this can cause a card's strength to be over-evaluated by many players.  For example, many people call Char "the best card in Standard" because 4 damage is so much and it can often win off the top.  Other cards, like Dark Confidant and Call of the Herd, do not stand out as much when they win games, even though they are often as strong or stronger than some cards like Char.  Of course, this point aside, Yawgmoth's Will in Vintage is pretty much the poster child for this effect.  Even many Standard players use phrases like, "It's like topdecking Yawgmoth's Win (tee hee) in Type 1!" to describe cards with big topdeck potential.

[Roat17]

To UR: I'm not saying that every game I lose I lose to a lucky topdeck.  Nor am I saying that I am the greatest player.  I started this thread in order to generate discussion on the bombs that people play that allow them to completely swing the game in their favour.  I also pointed out that I am interested in what coloured decks should support what card, and with proper deck building, luck is elminated and top decking is not merely lucky.  Rather, you drew a card that you were supposed to in this particular matchup and you now are able to pull a 360.


Also worth noting, is that I agree that Dark Confidant etc... are extremely powerdul cards as well.  However, in a world (and a format) where instant gratification takes precedent over long term investments, sometimes a [card name] is not that optimal.  I agree that it can still turn the game in your favour as having a Confidant in play on your side can allow you to empty your hand without as much worry about refilling it.

I generally see the cards with the most potential the ones that allow you to two for (or three or four).  But what I am most interested in, is when one person is losing, and they WILL lose unless they draw perhaps a certain card.  What are these certain cards that make playing like Joe Montana possible?

Thanks for your input so far people

[UR]

I disagree strongly.  I get manascrewed or manaflooded a lot more than 1 game in 100.  Add to that the number of times I've been crushed by a god draw against which I had no chance to win, the number of times my Limited opponent has drawn his bomb 2 games in a row while I couldn't find mine, the number of times I've made a statistically correct play only to have my opponent draw the one card he needed..... the game involves luck.  Period.  That, along with the lack of shared absolute information, is what separates it from chess.  And that's not even taking into account the luck of getting paired against a terrible matchup in which you have strategic inferiority.  I would say that no more than three quarters of my losses are due to misplays, in general.

Then you should have either mulliganned, taken more interest in your opponents 'tells' etc. etc. You can't convince me of the fact that there is something you could have done differently to affect the outcome of almost any given match. Sure, manascrew can get you, but can you really say that it is just bad luck? Or has it got something to do with the word 'Keep'? Strategic inferiority means you should have chosen a different deck for that tournament etc. etc.

Perhaps you are right that I overstated the percentages when I said 99 out of a 100, but most people blaim the wrong things all of the time. I suck, you suck, Mori sucks, Smennen sucks, Nuijten sucks. None of us can play the game flawlessly (sure, Mori is just about a 100 times better than I am, but you can still catch misplays by reviewing his pro-tour matches).

To UR: I'm not saying that every game I lose I lose to a lucky topdeck.  Nor am I saying that I am the greatest player.  I started this thread in order to generate discussion on the bombs that people play that allow them to completely swing the game in their favour.  I also pointed out that I am interested in what coloured decks should support what card, and with proper deck building, luck is elminated and top decking is not merely lucky.  Rather, you drew a card that you were supposed to in this particular matchup and you now are able to pull a 360.

'Lucky' topdecks are such a small part of the game that I don't think we should rate cards based on it. Ancestral Recall isn't nuts because you can win when you rip it from the top.

But to indulge you; I have played Commandeer in my mono-U deck last tournament and it singlehandedly won me a match when I commendeered his Gifts Ungiven. So I suppose that although it won't be a great topdeck in a great many situations, it does have the potential to swing a game around that you would otherwise have lost.

[Evol daN]

@Roat 17: In Short... that damned restricted card... FASTBOND


The situation...
game 3 turn 11 (his sixth turn) of top 8 with an Ancestral on the line.

The Decks...
He: 5c Stax, and a solid player.
Me: R/W Parfait, um.. obviously bad since I have played Parfait in the last year.

The position...
He: A workshop, a city, 2 Moxen, a Sphere and 1 card in hand, and a pile of a yard.
Me: 1 mountain and 1 plateau in a circa 35 card library; 2 plains, and 5 random busted control spells in hand. I just Scroll Racked into the Belcher and cast it with plans to untap and win as he does not appear to have the resources to pull it out.

His topdeck: FASTBOND, with a Crucible in hand, and Strip in the yard!! what a SACK... I am locked out after his Smokestack topdeck 2 turns later.
 
@UR: can you honestly tell me that I misplayed? The 1 Seal of Cleansing I saw killed a Smokestack ramped to 2 on his 3rd turn. Followed by Argivian Find/Seal of Cleansing for his first Crucible/Strip softlock. Should I have not kept Lotus, Land Tax, Scroll Rack, Plains, Mountain, Lava Dart, Seal of Cleansing? I had a Plains in my hand for the Chalice or Sphere, my hand was decidedly evil... yet so was his, a first turn Smokestack. The difference is that when I needed a third Seal of Cleansing effect (which I did not know that I needed) I did not get it. Rather I got a Belcher which would win the game in a vast majority of cases given the game state.

My point, you are wrong!
Lucksacking happens... hence one of the meanings of the Verb "to Mise"

[UR]

Should I have not kept Lotus, Land Tax, Scroll Rack, Plains, Mountain, Lava Dart, Seal of Cleansing?

I don't know your maindeck, your metagame, his maindeck, your plan of attack and I've never played white in Vintage. So I can't answer that question.

I had a Plains in my hand for the Chalice or Sphere, my hand was decidedly evil... yet so was his, a first turn Smokestack.

You know Stax is going to cast some lock piece on the first turn. Otherwise they mulligan. But back to the situation at hand...

Me: 1 mountain and 1 plateau in a circa 35 card library; 2 plains, and 5 random busted control spells in hand.

So what you are saying is that you are in control right?

I just Scroll Racked into the Belcher and cast it with plans to untap and win as he does not appear to have the resources to pull it out.

So it seems to me you got greedy and took a risk while you were in control.

Rather I got a Belcher which would win the game in a vast majority of cases given the game state.

So you had a bad beat. Doesn't mean you deserved the win.

My point, you are wrong!

No I don't think that I am. Blaming lucky topdecks or whatever doesn't make you a better player. Instead blaming lucky topdecks holds back your development as a player. Try and ascertain where you misplayed... ask other people. It is almost impossible to see your own misplays (otherwise, why would you have made them?).

I recently got some questions from better players than myself (Robert van de Medevoort and Rogier Maaten) about a play I made in a Vintage event and I could never come up with a satisfactory answer as to why I didn't play it like they would. That is because they are simply better than me. I made a mistake and I lost the game and I never would have found out if it wasn't for them. I was convinced that I was right yet I lost. All I needed was to topdeck that one extra mana for that extra Mana Drain before he found his mana. Damn topdecks! But now I blame the loss on myself because I'm sure there was a different line of play that I could have taken earlier in the game. Maybe it was something very subtle, but I misplayed somewhere along the line I'm sure of it. Just as I'm sure you made a mistake somewhere along the line that could have influenced the outcome.

[Evol daN]

@ UR

Ultimately I must agree with you since Philosophically I am a determinist, the present was specifically brought about by a chain of once very real events over which I had a choice in at least 1, my continued inclusion in the event chain.

What you seem to be ignoring is that the level of error made in games where a freak occurence happens, as in my example...
only 1 PERFECT card off the top (Fastbond: played in less than half of all 5c Stax decks, with 43 cards left he has roughly a 2.3% chance of topdeck as he does not have the mana to pull it off with a tutor...)
plus
1 PERFECT card in hand (Crucible, with one used, a 14.3% chance it is in his hand...)
could prevent my win. Further, this is the only way he can win or stop my win.

Combined that is less than a third of a percent chance that he snags the win away from me... IMO definately not greed, definately not much risk. Do you play poker? Would you go all in with a 99.7% chance of doubling your money? NO REASONABLE PERSON WOULD REFUSE THOSE ODDS!

You are right again... blaming topdecks does not make me a better player. But being able to calculate chances of success does, as does the ability to reproduce an internal risk evaluation thought and recheck the facts (as I have done here).

How can one learn from mistakes when the difference is literally where to cut the opponents deck, or in the order in which lands are Taxed out of a library. Given the trancient and insufficiently finite state of our minds we are unable to know where to cut the opponents library or which three copies of basic plains to Tax out first, or how many times to riffle shuffle 3, 4, or 5 times!

I am NOT saying that I do not make mistakes... noone can say that, IN FACT, noone in this thread is saying that.

What I AM saying is:
First, sometimes games are played perfectly from the perspective of a finite mind.
Second, that the example I provide is one such example where I made zero play errors once we grant that humans lack infinite knowledge.
Third, that despite the fact that a player makes a mistake that is NOT dependent on infinite knowledge they can still manouver into a place where they have an incredibly high chance of achieving the win.
Finally, Fourth, that despite OVERWHELMING odds (99.7%) sometimes the cards fall in one persons favor...

This is what we call luck...

Yup we have a whole word in our language dedicated to beating odds like 99.7 against. LUCK

[UR]

If it was really luck that caused you to lose, the question of why you lost becomes irrelevant because the answer is not something you can influence. Then there is no point to this discussion. What topdecks can get the job done? Each and every one of them. For every given situation there is a possible answer and it could show up at any time. If that is the case than there is no longer a point in trying to get better because no amount of careful planning can beat dumb luck. I for one, will refuse to believe it.

[zeus-online]

Urh, maybe the skill here, was really in your deck choice? If you had been playing a blue based control deck, you could have countered that game-ending bomb....Or if you had played aggro/aggro-control, your creatures might've finished him after he blew your lands away.

I do believe, however, that there are a precious few unwinable situations, but generally speaking, if they occur after turn 2, you could have done something different.

/Zeus