Quote (Traveler @ Dec. 10 2003,06:28)I just don't get Smmenen's ideology. Everything he's been complaining about in type 1 also occurs on a pro tour.
While type 1 has a large card pool, what can be played is dictated by limited print runs. Everyone at a 110 person tournament doesn't have 4 bazaars to have had dragon as an option even if they determined it to be the correct metagame call. They may be missing a timetwister and substitute in a suboptimal card. This happens all the time on the tour. Someone wants to play tog, but just has madness. Further, they can't find that last logic so in goes an extra counterspell. This is far more common in PTQs than in PTs, but it does occur. Perhaps this is why a vindicate is in a nether void deck.
Second, Smmenen complains about pet decks constantly. Zvi is known for playing turbo land. I think Smmenen has to realize that people have play styles and the best deck on paper may not be the best deck in their hands. Zvi is very good with turbo land. For him, it is a good call. This is also compounded by my first point that switching from keeper to dragon is a very expensive task, and requires a different view of the game. Changing keeper to as close to teir 1 as you can get it may be some players best chance of winning as opposed to playing the 'best deck'.
Speaking of best decks, there are always people playing tier 2 and 3 decks at Pro Tours and especially PTQs. There were lots of zombies at the last OnBC qualifiers. This is a natural part of the metagame. To expect all type 1 players to play the best decks or the top tier decks is ridiculous. Why would type 1 players only play 2 or 3 'best decks' while every other format plays many decks? The not so good decks exist as a result of the best decks. They are the decks that own one of the best decks but lose horribly to one of the others. A person makes a metagame call to run a certian teir 2 or 3 deck hoping for a metagame full of their best match up.
Finally, play skill and rogue decks are also an issue. The guy on his first tour isn't going to win. He has to know it, but he still shows up. Its arrogant and rediclous to imply that people can't play an event if they want, even if their deck isn't good. Final Fantasy in New Orleans did OK and the guy had a good time. There is nothing wrong with that, and it is part of the metagame. If TNT is dead, and someone wants to run it, its a rogue deck. People don't test against it, and their answers aren't there for it anymore. It gives the deck an edge which is why peope like to go rogue. TNT winning now may be due to people not having tested against it. That is a healthy metagame.
A metagame is never just 3 best decks. OnBC proved that with the last GP won by a rogue hate deck. A rogue hate deck is never the most powerful deck, and never will be a 'best deck'. However, they emerge in metagames and keep them interesting. Given time, that seemingly simple format would have been quite hard to predict as more hate decks emerged.
I think dragon has had such success lately because people are so scared of long. They hated long out but forgot about the dragon. The Jan 1st metagame will see a weakening of dragon as more hate is thrown its way. Then it will no longer be a 'best deck' despite perhaps having the most raw power on paper. It will be a teir 2 deck that is played when people think the meta has forgotten about the dragon.
I feel a philosophy about a type 1 metagame and player base that requires it to be more cometitive and rigid than even the pro tour is flawed.
That's becuase you have totally miscontrued my points and straw manned my argument.
Go read this:
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandnews.php?Article=5978Steve\n\n
