Shocking News: Buehler Writes Bad Article

[Machinus]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/af21


First of all, I don't appreciate Randy's offensive abuse of bolding - 48 instances of the same word bolded. Second, I think it is a very clear indicator that in fact, wizards IS somewhat scared of the allure of poker, contrary to what Buehler writes in the article.

Black Lotus usually sells for over a thousand dollars now...

I think this demonstrates the tone of the article pretty well.

In Magic, however, the so-called “casual players� vastly outnumber the tournament players.

There was some analysis recently of the revenue percentages from tournament players vs. casual players, and I don't know if this is true or not.

We're confident that in the future there will continue to be plenty of customers who will look at the differences between Magic and other games, including poker, and choose Magic (or choose both). We wish the rest of you good luck and we'll still be here if you get bored later.

You can tell that the bolding there is mine, since I didn't bold the word "Magic." Clearly there is more going on here than they want the average player to know about, if this is the stuff they are putting out on their main site. I wonder if it is really going to have an effect on the Pro Tour, like doing away with Standard altogether.

[Magi]

I don't know if you can blame him too much...it sort of seems like a "damage control" type of article, as if his back is against the wall.

[hulk3rules]

A second key difference between poker and Magic is the way each game awards prize money. In poker, you have to risk your own money if you want to win any prize money. In Magic, however, there's no gambling. Magic's Pro Tour is funded entirely by Wizards of the Coast – all you have to do is earn an invitation.

Last I heard, unless you were some big-shot pro the only way to "earn" an invitation is by spending money to enter, and win, a PTQ

In my opinion, the social dynamic in the Magic community (both on the web and at the events themselves) is far superior to the poker equivalent.

Hahaha, OK...

[The Atog Lord]

Randy has some cause for concern. Just to take Nationals as an example, there were quite a few people who went and played Poker, rather than money drafting, which they likely would have been doing a year ago.

Then there were the JSS'ers. These kids, no older than fifteen, were dropping Poker lingo like it was trendy. I can't tell you how many kids would attack with all their creatures and proudly yell out, "I'm all in," like it was the coolest thing ever.

One of these JSS'ers quoted Tom Guevin as saying, "if you think of Magic as Poker you'll never lose." He then went on to refer to Fact or Fiction as "the flop." Man, this got really old after a few days.

So, in conclusion, the fact that little kids are tossing around Poker lingo at a high-level event might be viewed as somewhat unsettling to Randy.

[Smmenen]

I have no idea why he would write an article on "which games is better."  That's like saying Go is better than C4ess, or C4ess is better than Backgammon.  It's not going to be persuasive even if you know both games intimately, and especially from someone like Randy.

I think he is approaching the issue entirely wrong and his article is equally unpersuasive.  If I were in his position, I would probably be frustrated too - but attacking poker doesn't really make alot of sense.

[rvs]

This is like, comparing apples to oranges.

[wuaffiliate]

yeah freshly picked apples to rotten oranges. it's clear which game is better.

[Dr. Sylvan]

I thought that they bolded every instance of "Magic" in every article. I don't know why, but it definitely wasn't Randy's direct "abuse of bolding". (See here as an example from the last thing Buehler wrote, or here for a Rosewater example.)

And to be fair about the Lotus thing, every SCG listing is $1000-plus, and at the very least bb Lotii are a grand unless I'm sorely mistaken, since I don't really follow the prices closely. Giving him guff about that is way too nitpicky.

To me, this smacked of, "We're getting a lot of email about this. Buehler, you're in charge, write something about Poker and take the flak because you're not a regular columnist anymore so we won't mind if people don't like you as much." I think it would have been better not to take an official stance, especially since this had no new information. In fact, it echoed edt's SCG article from a few weeks ago without being as good.

[Jacob Orlove]

From the comments thread for that article:

Babylonian - There's no big controversy, it's just that some people seem scared by the cross-over of our Pro Tour players. With Dave making that high-profile score (and other more famous players obviously playing less Magic recently), we thought we should remind people that the PT players aren't actually all that important to the health of the game. (I guess I'm glad you didn't need this reminder :-).)

Randy

[Ric_Flair]

I am not sure what the point of the article is, this is sorta preaching to the choir.  The real issue is if the Poker players continue to play Magic, if they do everything is fine.  If not, then there is an issue.

[Jhaggs]

For all the reasons I outlined above, we think Magic is a better strategy game than poker. Magic is deeper, more interesting, and more fun than poker.

For his accomplishment, Dave earned $3.5 million.

I think a lot of people would debate in favor of poker being the more strategy intensive & deeper game.  I think a lot of people find poker much more interesting and more fun than magic.  

This article really wasn't necessary as it was mentioned before that it is like comparing apples and oranges.  However, 3.5 million dollars and being able to play in a casino clearly makes poker more "adult".

EDIT:  It is really too bad that Magic no longer requires an ante.  If players had to pony up a rare (or cash) everytime they played, it would make the game so much more interesting.  The risk & reward factor in Poker gives it a essence that Magic will never be able to capture.

[Dr. Sylvan]

I think I speak for the overwhelming majority that is very, very happy ante is no longer part of Magic. I doubt if even most 5-Color players (at least, outside organized events) use it. Really, it is a horrible disincentive to collect or pimpify your cards if you randomly lose some of them all the time. Plus, tournaments would be ridiculous--your deck would have to have a different structure to compensate for potential lost antes (think Draw7: people couldn't play with two win conditions, because they risk losing them to ante).

[Jhaggs]

Dr. Sylvan,

Agreed.  I should have been clearer on my point.  What I was driving at was that it is too bad that Magic doesn't require you to pony up some cards as a wager, that aren't from your deck or sideboard.  If players in a tournament had to bet a rare from there collection, I think it would make the games much more intense and interesting and people would be less inclined to show up with decks that are horrible and untested.

Poker has a distinctly different edge to it because there is a risk involved and at times that risk can be big.  You don't really have anything to risk in Magic which is one reason why poker has such a large appeal to it.  Granted that Magic has MANY unique qualities as well, but it doesn't require the player to wager which in my opinion is a big difference in games.

[theorigamist]

Jhaggs, I don't know about most people, but if I had to put up a random rare, I would toss in some junk rare I had drafted, and then it's really no incentive or disincentive at all.  Especially if your opponent does the same thing, and then you don't win a good card (you instead win more chaff to ante up for the next game).

I can understand your point if the ante is money, but I don't necessarily agree with it.

[Machinus]

@Dr. Sylvan

Yeah, I know it was anal to call Randy on his price quote of loti, but seriously WotC STILL hasn't gotten the Type 1 game figured out and it is really irritating that they keep talking about it when they never get any wiser about it. And as for the bolding, I know they always bold "Magic," but in an article where he knows he is going to be typing it fifty times, he could give my eyes a rest and do something different.

Or maybe I just really dont like Randy Buehler.

Anyway, I feel like it was a bad move on the part of WotC to publish this article AT ALL, because it freely admits that they see Poker as competition and as a threat to their revenue. On top of that, they are openly disowning pro players, and making it sound like WotC has already lost the battle to game that is older, more accessible, and more popular. Clearly there is no battle here, and it should not really be a concern to those who aren't out purely for money. Magic is successful because it offers many things which Poker does not. Treating them as competitors is a bad move.

[dandan]

I think the point about Ante is a valid one. Ante Magic should be viewed as a diiferent kind of Magic to Constructed and a subset of Limited kind of like Draft.

Once upon a time a group of us all bought one of those Revised boxes containing 2 packs of 60 cards (including lands back then). We then constructed decks from those decks and duelled for Ante. Brilliant!! (We had a rule that you could refuse Land as an Ante, taking the next card, etc). Simple commons like Disenchant were power cards!! I remember a game that I won because I decided to cast a Treefolk over a Craw Wurm (facing a Doppleganger), I remember losing my Cockatrice, I remember decks of spare cards willing to trade 5 bad cards for that lucky win and a good Ante card, I remember taking Land as Ante to sort out my mana base, I remember the fear in facing a deck containing a Serra and the horror of facing off against a deck with 2 Uthden Trolls and a FatMoti.

New players joined with fresh decks, older players built up fearsome decks or were retited by losing too high a percentage of good cards.

It wasn't Type I but somehow it was exactly how I imagine a Mr. Garfield had imagined Magic should be.

[Joel Rojo]

I never played for ante, but I totally miss the kind of games that Dandan is talking about, I remember when exodus came out and I always kicked ass with a completely crappy deck, and then everyone feared my KILLER WHALE,  3UU 3/5 creature that needed U to get flying. You may call it dumb, but it felt great, it all had a feeling that I miss so much.