[VIDEOS] Waterbury Feature Match thread

[orgcandman]

This thread is here for the Waterbury Feature Match videos. Currently, I have to "localhost" them on my server. I'm hoping other TMDers with more access + bandwidth will be gracious enough to host some mirrored sites.

Without further ADO, the videos can be found at:

http://aconole.brad-x.com/waterbury

Currently, only round 1 game 2 is up. I'll update when I put other ones up.

Aaron

PS: I need the other person's videos for the other angles and the missing rounds.

[arj]

Good work! Looking forward to seeing them.

I think if you put up torrents (http://bittorrent.com/) for the videos it could help with the bandwidth issue.

[Shaman]

I saw the two videos. But expecially in the first, it seems that the guy in front of the camera is playing a little slower than allowed. Am I wrong? It's too early to call a judge since it is the first round, but I usually get annoyed in seeing my opponents looking one hundred times the same 4 cards in their hands without doing ANYTHING for 4 long minutes, maybe more.

[Kowal]

I'm disappointed that we couldn't hear the "MYKE-A-TOG" chant me and Eastman got going.

[That0neguy]

Is it just me or are the videos not working.  They only come up as a bunch of random symbols.

Maby its just that im on a mac but if anyone knows how to help it would be apprciated.

Without having seen the videos im guessing the person was Steve and considering how complicated the deck he is playing is i would say that its probably resonable.  I have spent a couple minutes figuring out the math for a combo deck in tournies before it can be really complex.

[Whatever Works]

Is it just me or are the videos not working.  They only come up as a bunch of random symbols.

Maby its just that im on a mac but if anyone knows how to help it would be apprciated.

Without having seen the videos im guessing the person was Steve and considering how complicated the deck he is playing is i would say that its probably resonable.  I have spent a couple minutes figuring out the math for a combo deck in tournies before it can be really complex.

Ya, but how often does it take you 16 minutes to do a first turn kill??? Especially when there are not that many complicated plays in what I would consider a rather simple hand.

[M.Solymossy]

see i never understood the whole "doing math" thing and ditermining the best course of action.  Combo deck's really have just put themselves together for me.....  Just go go go the right path is always seemingly obvious to me...  

maybe cuz it isn't always the right course of action

[the Luke]

Is it just me or are the videos not working.  They only come up as a bunch of random symbols.

Maby its just that im on a mac but if anyone knows how to help it would be apprciated.

Without having seen the videos im guessing the person was Steve and considering how complicated the deck he is playing is i would say that its probably resonable.  I have spent a couple minutes figuring out the math for a combo deck in tournies before it can be really complex.

Do you have Windows Media Player for Mac?  If you try "Save As" in Safari, it should work.

And Steve spends five minutes without playing a spell.

-Luke

[Disburden]

On topic I would say the video is great to watch except for the sound which is full of background noise. I wish I could hear what Myke-A-Tog is saying during this match up. As far as taking long to play a spell due to the deck being a difficult combo deck, it is still illegal in a tournament. Especially for ten minutes or longer. I would've called for a judge after three minutes, nevermind ten minutes. I have a feeling that Meandeck tendrils wouldn't have won the first match if there wasn't sitting at the table for ten minutes while a spell waits on the stack. I'm surprised Mykeatog didn't go to sleep for a mid-tourney nap  

Can't wait for the other rounds!

[Methuselahn]

Saying the plays are not complicated is way off base.  I know I would spend that much time if I could, but unfortunately for combo players, the rules don't favor them this way.  Magic is a game, not a scientific procedure,  if the opportunity to play, excersize your routes and take back moves were allowed during a tourny more people would be winning with them.  Meandeck SX, for example, would be the best deck ever if this was possible.

By the looks of the video, Smmenen gets Mykeatog really worked up waiting to play.  It's both annoying and very amusing at the same time.  

[orgcandman]

A few things.

#1 - This tournament happend. You can't change the results. Whether someone SHOULD or SHOULDN'T have done something is NOT an issue here.

#2 - I put these up so that people would have something better that just reading a feature match report. I'm sick of seeing things in high profile tournament reports like "Jugz takes it home" and the likes. It's interesting to see if the losing player attempts to get out of a strangle hold, and what they do to accomplish this, if they can. If a picture is worth 1000 words, a video is worth it's drive-space in gold (which for uncompressed video is a lot). No flamewars.

#3 - I'll be updating tonight, most likely, with the rest of round 1 (the one that mykeatog and smmenen are STILL playing) and possibly rounds 2 and 3.

Aaron

[Whatever Works]

Let me change me words a little... To say that the hand was simple is not accurate, but I believe the incredibly ammount of time put into the decision was a bit over the top... If I took that long (or most people who arent Smennen) a judge would be called, but people give him the benefit of the doubt, because he is playing such a highly decision sensative deck...

So I am not saying that the deck is easy to play or your exact hand was incredibly odvious and could have played itself (like many long.dec hands do, but then again this is not that deck), but what I am saying is that from Mykatog's point of view it was INCREDIBLY frusterating to wait for 15 minutes wondering... Hmmm.. I wonder if he got his math right #1... and #2 I wonder If I am ever going to have my 1st turn...

I didnt mean for my comment to come off as an insult, and I have played the deck so its not like im oblivious... I just believe that during swiss rounds there is a pre-set expectation to play at a curtain speed (doesnt mean it has to be fast) to be fair to your opponents.

 If this was top 16 or 8, etc. I would be 100% in favor of you taking that long for a turn, but in Swiss I am sure that almost every1 would agree that there is an unwritten rule about play speed that was odviously ignored game 1, (and during the 5 turn clock where 200 people had to wait 45 minutes for you to finish those 5 turns), However that was after Swiss therefore I was glad to wait for you to figure out the precise move in those 5 turns, because I was watching and it was clear to every1 that it wasnt an accept 1 way decision.

I have no problem at all with the long turns in those situations, but I was kinda ennoyed by the slightly over the top celebration following the turn 1 kill. A high five here and there or a comment to a friend is cool, but a player who has done 100's upon 100's of them has no need to show up an opponent like Mykatog.

In essence, Your decks complicated (We all know that), but that doesnt give any player the right to take a 15 minute turn during SWISS...It just doesnt give your opponent enough time to have a fair chance to win... By maybe making a possibly misplay by playing slightly faster is a risk, but then again thats less detrimental to you then it is to an opponent who will be irritated, and rushed to try and complete a round.

[That0neguy]

Thanks for the advice i was using explorer but switched to safari and it worked.

BTW i will agree that 10 mins is rediculus i would say 2-3 mins max.  The most i have spent is probably 2 minutes.  I would also agree that the hands seem to auto piolt themselves more me most of the time.

The video probably could have cut out some of the shuffling in the first round.

[Whatever Works]

The next time they have feature matches it might be slightly more effective if they just have 1 camera focused in on the field of play. The current format that was experimented at Waterbury would have been effective, but it was limited to the inability to have clear views of peoples hands, and only a good idea of what is/isnt in play by the occasional zoom... In real tournements I have always liked watching from the middle, because then every result is a little more unexpected, and exciting. Also 1 camera on the field of play could have much greater detail then 2 at odd angles.

1 accurate camera where you know whats in play 100% accurate > 2 cameras that can give occasionally decent shots, and limited to know realistic view of a persons hand. (I could be off in this view because I only watched the 2 games from round 1).

Kyle

[orgcandman]

The next time they have feature matches it might be slightly more effective if they just have 1 camera focused in on the field of play. The current format that was experimented at Waterbury would have been effective, but it was limited to the inability to have clear views of peoples hands, and only a good idea of what is/isnt in play by the occasional zoom... In real tournements I have always liked watching from the middle, because then every result is a little more unexpected, and exciting. Also 1 camera on the field of play could have much greater detail then 2 at odd angles.

Actually, we switched to this format. The round 4 video (which is up right now. And it's only 1 video) actually is the first of the videos to do that. The subsequent videos all look like that. We'll probably do that next time. Although, we may bring 3 cameras, and likely set the area up differently to help with sound.

Currently rounds 1, 2, and 4 are all up. I have rounds 3, 5, and 8 to go. I also need Aaron Rubenslein's videos so that we can have rounds 6 and 7, and so that we can have the other angles of round 1,2, and 3. If anyone knows him/knows how to contact him make sure to relay the sentiment.

Thanks,
Aaron

[iamfishman]

Not to sound really repetative, but I think it needs to be said.

Thanks again to Aaron and his girl Kerri for there tremendous help with this.  If you enjoyed the videos, shoot a pm to Organcandman and let him know.

They roxors my soxors.

[carlossb]

This is is the most amazing coverage of a tourney I have never seen.
Seriously, this is FAR better than the WoTC coverage on their PT.

So far, we have a lot of good reports, a lot of decklists,  a great attendance, power9 prizes, ... and now a lot of videos/feature matches!!

This tournament should be The Tournament, not GenCon.

[Eastman]

If you watch the second match coverage, you'll hear me and PTW spend the first few minutes talking about how ridiculously long it was taking to play the round prior.

[Juggernaut GO]

Personal insults are uncalled for.
-Jacob

[xrizzo]

I was amazed how long these rounds lasted.  I don't care how difficult your deck is to play, if I had to sit across from a player doing nothing (spell and permanent wise) for even 5 minutes:
- I would call a judge
- I would probably not perform as well

Maybe this strategy was used intentionally.  As someone who normally plays a deck with 12-16 counters, it is difficult to tell which spells are the correct ones to counter.  Waiting 5 min between some spells becomes really tedious.

Lastly, the yell after Smemmen got Yawg was amuzing -- brought back memories of Howard Dean.  

[Smmenen]

I usually call the judge over if two minutes have gone by and my opponent has done nothing.  That's perfectly legitimate.

[Eastman]

I usually call the judge over if two minutes have gone by and my opponent has done nothing.  That's perfectly legitimate.

Are you saying that Mike should have called a judge?

[Whatever Works]

This post was garbage.
-Jacob

[orgcandman]

Ok, Rounds 3 and 5 are up (well, round 5 is in transit as I write this).

All I have left is round 8. Aaron Rubenslein NEEDS to get in touch with me to provide me with the missing rounds.

Aaron

[Smmenen]

I usually call the judge over if two minutes have gone by and my opponent has done nothing.  That's perfectly legitimate.

Are you saying that Mike should have called a judge?

Is what I said difficult to understand?

[Eastman]

I usually call the judge over if two minutes have gone by and my opponent has done nothing.  That's perfectly legitimate.

Are you saying that Mike should have called a judge?

Is what I said difficult to understand?

It isn't difficult to understand, but it is a surprising enough position for you to take that I wanted to be sure I wasn't misreading it.

It suggests that you intentionally and knowingly broke the rules in tournament play.  
It suggests that you played in a way you would consider unacceptable of an opponent.

Is that right?

[Anders Noer]

What is with people making stupid posts in this thread?
-Jacob

[Smmenen]

I usually call the judge over if two minutes have gone by and my opponent has done nothing.  That's perfectly legitimate.

Are you saying that Mike should have called a judge?

Is what I said difficult to understand?

It isn't difficult to understand, but it is a surprising enough position for you to take that I wanted to be sure I wasn't misreading it.

It suggests that you intentionally and knowingly broke the rules in tournament play.  
It suggests that you played in a way you would consider unacceptable of an opponent.

Is that right?

Clearly I was wrong in assuming what I said was easy to understand.  

You are wrong on all counts.  I wasn't suggesting anything whatsoever exccept what I said: If an opponent takes more than 2 minutes without playing a spell, I call a judge.  Got it?

The reason I call a judge is to make sure that person is playing at a reasonable pace.  The judge watches the play.  The judge is NOT called becuase you are concluding that the person is breaking the rules - the judge is called to make sure that a player doesn't break the rules.  See tthe difference?   I'm surprised that you jumped the gun in making all those unwarranted assumptions about things that I was suggesting that I wasn't.

I wasn't suggesting anything - I was simply asserting the fact that I call the judge over if my opponent spends over 2 minutes on a play.

[Eastman]

I wasn't suggesting anything - I was simply asserting the fact that I call the judge over if my opponent spends over 2 minutes on a play.

We were not having a discussion of when you call judges during your games, Steve.

This particular discussion was about a game you played where you took an exceptionally long time.

By bringing what you said to this particular table you formed the idea that you would have called the judge on yourself.

You didn't say it directly, but by "simply inserting the fact that"

'Smmenen calls the judge after 2 minutes' into a discussion about
'Smmenen took 10 minutes to make a play'
you forced the conclusion: (because 2<10)
'Smmenen would have called the judge on himself'


That is how I arrived at those conclusions.
That isn't 'jumping the gun,' it's logic.

[Jacob Orlove]

'Smmenen calls the judge after 2 minutes' into a discussion about
'Smmenen took 10 minutes to make a play'
you forced the conclusion: (because 2<10)
'Smmenen would have called the judge on himself'

That wasn't what he was responding to, Dave:

It suggests that you intentionally and knowingly broke the rules in tournament play.

The judge is NOT called becuase you are concluding that the person is breaking the rules - the judge is called to make sure that a player doesn't break the rules.

Steve would have called a judge in Mike's shoes, but that doesn't make Steve a cheater, as you stated.