After reading the JP's post about the possible "death...

[Bastian]

After reading the JP's post about the possible "death" of Keeper, one question arised: why do some people play strictly inferior decks when they can play and win with better ones? Why does one play a deck that might not be so good others available?

I play with White Weenie because I like the deck, I like the strategy no matter how simple it is and because it was the first deck I started playing and winning with when I started playing Magic some years ago.

I became extremely attached to it and even though it's definitly not one of the most advisable choices to play I don't play it with just casual play in mind, but I also try to further tune it and keep alive one of the oldest (and personal favourite) deck there is. I do play TNT and from time to time I do like to test some other things, but WW still has too much going for me for me not to play it.

[Vegeta2711]

It's T1, why do you think people play inferior decks? Card access and personal over bearing attachment to their pet projects.

[Kerzkid11]

Well, first of all not all people are bitches to tmd. Not everyone goes and reads everyday and keeps up on all the newest tech and what is good/bad.

Some people don't have the time/energy to keep up to date with the metagame from day to day. These people will have enough knowlege to know a lot of the major archetypes, but they will always play what they like/what suits them best.

I know its been said a million times before, but a lot of people that play this game arn't in it to win every tournament, but just to have some fun, and maybe forget their problems for a little via some pices of cardboard.

Now, the good players always wanting to play the #1 deck is the problem I mentioned Sligh has, in my Sligh mini-article "Sligh in the Current Metagame". Sligh is usually represented by new/budget players, and that is why the deck is still considered sub-par.

Now, I am admittedly a tmd bitch, and I play this game competively. But not all people are.

[DerangedParrot]

Quote Now, I am admittedly a tmd bitch, and I play this game competively. But not all people are.

So beat down the fools who aren't competitive, take their prizes, and be happy.  I just think it's funny that some T1 people play bad decks and then complain about stupid small children who play T2 when really they are just the same as the small children becuase they all play bad decks and lose without caring.  Shrug.  I hoped that people would see the light of goodness and go play good decks instead, but most people here are nearly as immune to reason as RM is.  No big deal, I said what needed to be said and if no one wants to listen fine

[MoreFling]

I'd like to add to what kerzkid11 says that although we consider a 'broad' metagame, that might not be the case everywhere. Not all T1 tournaments has all the top decks. Hell, the top deck can actually be crushed in another metagame should it try to compete there. There are only a few big metagames in the world that are really representative to what is currently going on in Vintage (some that come to mind: Duelmen, Eindhoven, C&J's, and some others). So whatever works in your personal metagame, is what you should play. A good example of this is Wasp and how he keeps doing well in Dreamers, which certainly is different from the considered 'regular' metagame.
People like their old cards, so they play T1. That's basicly what is the 'other' motivation to come to a T1 tourney.

[MarkPharaoh]

Quote (MoreFling @ Sep. 01 2003,14:25)I'd like to add to what kerzkid11 says that although we consider a 'broad' metagame, that might not be the case everywhere. Not all T1 tournaments has all the top decks. Hell, the top deck can actually be crushed in another metagame should it try to compete there. There are only a few big metagames in the world that are really representative to what is currently going on in Vintage (some that come to mind: Duelmen, Eindhoven, C&J's, and some others). So whatever works in your personal metagame, is what you should play. A good example of this is Wasp and how he keeps doing well in Dreamers, which certainly is different from the considered 'regular' metagame.
People like their old cards, so they play T1. That's basicly what is the 'other' motivation to come to a T1 tourney.

Yep, like in a meta like mine, I have played against T2 Slide as many times as I have Keeper, and I am sure there are even worse metagames then mine, my decks look weird but they get the job done in my meta.

[Os-Vegeta]

The biggest factor in playing "inferior" decks is playstyle, or at least it is for me.  I just love disrupting my opponent to the point where he wants to beat me with a baseball bat and then dropping a couple threats and smashing face.  That is the reason why I don't play control, lock, or combo, though I would be tempted to play Tog just because of its "screw it - I'm just gonna win" attitude.  So, I stick to playing aggro decks, mainly Sui and Sligh (though I haven't been using it as of late), and sometimes a Survival-Mask build.  I'm just too aggressive of a player to really get into combo or control.

[jpmeyer]

I think there's just been a rude awakening in the past year in terms of "what is Type 1."  Before, Type 1 was the format where you could assemble one deck and play it forever.  However, with the massive innovation in the last year, we've seen dozens of new decks rise and fall.  It's going to be hard for some people to accept the fact that Type 1 really isn't the static format that it once was.

[Milton]

It's metagame dependant.

Many people look at a deck list and dismiss it as being "inferior" to Hulk, to Keeper, to Stacks, to whatever is trendy.  This ignores the fact that those decks can very easily be hated out by a metagame with bad match-ups.  What if Mask is prevelant in your meta?  What if Null Rod Suicide or Fish are making an apperance?

Also, you have to understand that many people even on TMD don't know shit about your metagame.  So, you post a decklist and they might say "well, no one plays with four Wastelands anymore" or "Gorilla Shaman is total ass in todays metagame", but they ignore the fact that these cards might be very powerful in your metagame.

[bebe]

Some of us like to play new and innovative decks. When i played Lock, Stock there was no Stax around and I played Toronto Stompy before Madness was tuned.
Marc and i promoted Fish when everyone and their uncle ( excluding Rakso) on BD said it was not evn a Tier 2 deck. I refuse to netdeck.
I also experimented with Bloody Sui and Sligh splash black over a year and a half ago.
Now, infering that that makes me a Type 2 kiddie is plain insulting. We have now a very wide meta. With a little thought I can hate out all the popular decks and compete. Shockwave, Dicemanx, Lam and others all play in my meta but i have managed to top four more often than not in a meta filled with the top decks.
No, I do not play to win every week. I would like to win but I also like to experiment almost as much. Currently I've been  playing EBA, Bloody Sui and Toronto Stompy as all my P9 are tied up at the store for the moment. Should I stop playing?  
Innovation never really died. We just took a hiatus for awhile.

[Matt The Great]

1. Tournament victories and glories come only in real life. No one cares if you win an online tournament.

2. I will likely never have the physical cards to compete at the highest level.

3. I also have no 'scene' in which to play.

From these points, we can deduce that if I want any real satisfaction, it will come as a deckbuilder, not a player. Thus, I build and tune decks in the hope that I'll make something worthwhile. Taking the time to master an established archetype is all but time wasted, for me. The only truly important thing I get from playing with such decks is to know their weaknesses - the better to attack them.

I guess you could say I don't play the top decks because they're already on top, and don't need my help.\n\n

[wuaffiliate]

because sui is more fun to play than any other deck, bar only MUD. plus it can be adapted to any metagame, so it can always evolve.

[Toast]

because I am under the illusion that all other decks are inferior to mine naturally

All joking aside...I think your question is a little narrowminded. I don't think there is a single deck that is strictly superior and I think a lot of what people play depends on their playstyle.

I know that I don't like the long frantic deck digging that occurs when playing a combo deck so I tend to shy away from that kind of deck. I also don't like the slow clock that most control decks give their opponent so I shy away from pure control as well. My niche happens to be found in TnT. The one aspect of the deck that I didn't like (the lack of influence and knowledge over your opponents hand) I tuned my deck to fix.

 I have always been of the mindset that a great deck is one that never has a matchup that it scoops to...or even a matchup where you are smacking yourself in the face every time you have to play it. I feel that my build of TnT has a decent chance against anything. I am not scrambling constantly to adapt to the metagame just because expert metagame analyst joe claims that this or that new decktype is the deck to beat. I adapt my deck when a new set comes out and that is about it. I rely on luck and playskill for the rest because I haven't bothered to metagame in the first place so I don't have to worry about changing it whenever the metagame changes.

As much good information and expert players as we have on this site, half of the stuff we hear about this or that dominating the format is highly exaggerated.

this is a timeline of what things have been like just in the short 8 months I have been a member here

OMG TnT is unstoppable!!!!!! wizards needs to restrict workshop....keeper is dead.

OMG GAT is the brokenest deck EVAR nothing stands a chance

OMG Beserk is unrestricted every deck should run 4 and we should jack up the price sooooo much with our speculation that toast can sell his beta playset for a $150 profit.

OMG storm = the end of the format...combo is unbeatable!!!!1!one!

OMG stax/mud/hulk is unbeatable and all other decks are inferior.....and the list goes on.

what the "best deck" is fluctuates more than the stockmarket. You guys can claim whatever you want is the best deck and you can tell me 1000 times that TnT is not viable. I have stopped caring. Every deck has bad matchups, every deck can be hated out. I am much more content playing a deck that I know will have a decent chance against everything than playing the "superior" deck at the moment.

[Zherbus]

Because 1) Keeper is fine, and 2) Keeper is propbably the only deck that can recover after it loses the opening hand war because it runs solutions, while other decks just don't.

[Rico Suave]

Winning with the best deck is satisfying, but winning with a worse deck means that you're so good you can beat the best people even at a handicap.  Or something like that.  

Another reason is that people are so convinced that just because they change a few cards around that suddenly the deck will win, and they go into denial if other people say it still won't win much.  

Personally, I find it more fun to win with a deck that requires thinking as opposed to a boring one.  If the best deck in the format was sligh, I would not play it because it doesn't require thinking.  It just so happens that most top decks require thinking.  That's about the only reason I'd play an "inferior deck."\n\n

[Bastian]

The question was, indeed, a bit narrowminded and I should have explained myself better.

What I wanted to know was to know why some people do chose certain deck choices even when decks that can do better are available? Is it the cardpool available to them? What if even they do have said cardpool they decide to play something that is strictly "inferior".

When I say "inferior" note that I'm not saying that there are clearly "superior" or "inferior" decks. The metagame is ever changing and what is good today may not be so tomorrow. I was curious to know what reasons move people to play decks that are known to not perform so well if there are better ones available or if they'd rather play to win all the time.

Rico Suave gave one of the best answers and one I completely agree with. I wouldn't play anything I don't like. He likes decks that demand thinking and even if Sligh was better he wouldn't play because Sligh doesn't require the elegance and thought that some other decks do.

I play White Weenie for the reasons posted. I like the deck, I've been playing it since ever and I believe it can perform well if further tuned. Actually a great part of my work on this format has been around the deck. (like if you didn't know this already   )\n\n

[wuaffiliate]

omg WW sux your life has been a lie!!!! OMGWTFBBQ

 

i play sui for the same reason you play WW, and it feels great to kick the ass of someone who plays a top tier deck.\n\n

[Azhrei]

I've been lucky. For one, I always play the best deck-- the deck I feel I stand the best chance of winning a tournament with, regardless of color, style, or whatever. I played Necro for a long time in tournaments, for example.

I've been lucky, however, in that the best deck is generally something that fits my play style: blue, control, draws cards, offers humiliating and crushing defeat with no chance of fun for the opponent. I played Keeper about 2 months into the late 2002 revolution and stopped playing for months because I knew it wasn't that good anymore. If I couldn't have the best deck, I didn't want to play.

If I want to play for fun, I'll go fence instead.  

[kl0wn]

Inferior decks? Pfffft.

I usually finish in the money regardless of what I'm playing, as long as it's not control. Hell, last Saturday I put The Funker together at 4am (complete with Covetous Dragons), added Duresses and Pyrostatic Pillars, then proceded to smash my way into the finals and split the cash.

Two weeks before that, I took Sligh to the finals.

Two weeks before that, I wrecked Ninja Mask's mana base to hell and made Top 8 at TMD 2.

I have no idea what you mean by inferior decks.

[DeathByDreams]

Before I quit a few months ago i played rOSE even though it was "outdated" due to GAT and Hulk Smash being far superior. I could've easily got the cards for either deck and played them but I found it to be pointless. It didn't matter to me as long as I had fun playing. Now I have no expensive cards(Drains, Power, Masks, Workshops, etc) and a lot less cash so I play whatever I can afford and make the best of it. As long as it's fun I'll still be playing even if I'd get smacked around by better decks. The way my local metagame is currently me and IICEman win everything anyways.

EDIT: I honestly need to take keyboarding in school this year.\n\n

[dandan]

I will always have a Sligh deck because:

1. Whatever other 'projects' I have, they have to test against Sligh
2. Sometimes you don't have 10 minutes/turn
3. I want to make a version of Sligh that is the best possible in the current metagame. This version should be Tier 2 at worst.
4. Every few years people 'forget' about Sligh and with little/no SB hate around, Sligh is more than capable of taking down the best.
5. I don't have to strip the Undergrounds out of other decks to make my Sligh
6. Beating down with little runts then burning out an opponent is what Magic should be about, not rules loopholes (Dragon) or design mistakes (Tog, Academy)
7. Keeper vs Sligh is always an interesting matchup

[Magimaster]

Quote (kl0wn @ Sep. 01 2003,20:14)Inferior decks? Pfffft.

I usually finish in the money regardless of what I'm playing, as long as it's not control. Hell, last Saturday I put The Funker together at 4am (complete with Covetous Dragons), added Duresses and Pyrostatic Pillars, then proceded to smash my way into the finals and split the cash.

Two weeks before that, I took Sligh to the finals.

Two weeks before that, I wrecked Ninja Mask's mana base to hell and made Top 8 at TMD 2.

I have no idea what you mean by inferior decks.

Playskill. I know people who regardless of what format they play in, they always do well, with any deck they make.

As for me, I'm gonna have to go with the old I don't have the money excuse. I could have gotten $850 worth of power this summer, or I could get a digital camera and a car stereo. I guess my priorities in life are different. Both are non-essential to my life, except merely for entertainment purposes. As long as the west coast doens't have a "real" metagame, I won't be getting any power, although Kandykid said something about getting me a Pearl at discount for my Birthday.

Forgive my typing, my computer is fucking up. I would not normally type like an incoherent child.

[Zherbus]

Moved, should probably be elsewhere.