[Free Article] Smmenen's Look at the Restricted list

[Smmenen]

Respectfully, that is a piece written by a budding lawyer rather than a statistician or scientist.  Could you possibly have chosen your data set more selectively?  Europeans don't know how to metagame, and the only tournaments that matter occur in the Northeastern US.  Restrictions would have global ramifications, but let's only examine data from one distinct geographical area.  I think not.  Duelmen and the larger Italian tournaments leap to mind as being worthy of analysis and having readily available data, but they are glaringly omited.

You also take for granted that everything hinges on your own definition of "distorting" and on the logical contortions necessary to make Mana Drain acceptable.  Drain is ok because people like playing it?  It seems people like playing Goblin Welder, too.

I could have spent more time describing what I meant.  I'll try and fix that here.

Basically, I have a very complex argument demonstrating that Mana Drain is necessary not becuase people like it, but becuase the format is ruined without it.  I beleive that its restriction would kill control entirely and, so long as poeple are working on the format, it would become aggro-control and tier two combo (assuming that workshop is also restricted).  The tier two combo (all using FOW) would beat aggro and control and the aggro-control would be good enough to beat aggro and control.  Don't ask me more for that becuase it would take some time to explain.

This creates a problem though.  Something important in the article is the notion that restrictions may not rebalance the format - they may lead to greater imbalance.  This is what i call the risk of a cascading restricted list.  The problem is that restricting either Ritual or Workshop would lead to an inevitable cascade that leads either to the restriction of Drain or it staying around, but in a dominant position.  

It puts the format between a rock and a hard place and I beleive that it is better to be where we are becuase of it.  

As for my tournament selection, I have already said that I am highly critical of the use of Dr. Sylvan's data.  There is no logical or statistical reason for 50 person threshold.  I would prefer, frankly, a 200 person threshold or a 150 person threshold.  Or, given the practical constraints, a 100 person threshold.  I think 50 is too low, particularly given the metagame... oddities, shal we say, that many of the European tournaments exhibit.  

Would someone care to put together all the tournaments of over 100 people and see what the results are?

Moreover, i completely disagree that I was as geographically select as you claim.  My data was from Indianapolois to Chicago to Richmond to Boston to Conn.  That includes the South, the NE, and the midwest with six tournaments from each place.  To say that is geographically selective is not false, but it is not as true as anyone here has yet claimed.

[epeeguy]

Please tell me your not saying that you should not have to remove a creature to win games. That is insane!

No.  As I clearly continue to say in my post, a problem developes with you get to the point where you are either running the card, or running an answer the card.  If you get to the point where there is such a dynamic as that, then you have to take a look at the metagame and assess whether or not it is truly healthy.

I'm not suggesting that the format is unhealthy now.  Nor am I suggesting that Goblin Welder is so good that it needs to be Restricted (though I do not believe that just because it is a creature automatically exempts it from the possibility of Restriction).  All I was doing was responding to your point about running answers to cards as being a metagame choice.

While, most of the time, that is an accurate assessment; there are times where it can not be.

[Smmenen]

Please tell me your not saying that you should not have to remove a creature to win games. That is insane!

No.  As I clearly continue to say in my post, a problem developes with you get to the point where you are either running the card, or running an answer the card.  If you get to the point where there is such a dynamic as that, then you have to take a look at the metagame and assess whether or not it is truly healthy.

I'm not suggesting that the format is unhealthy now.  Nor am I suggesting that Goblin Welder is so good that it needs to be Restricted (though I do not believe that just because it is a creature automatically exempts it from the possibility of Restriction).  All I was doing was responding to your point about running answers to cards as being a metagame choice.

While, most of the time, that is an accurate assessment; there are times where it can not be.

Well said.  No one had yet brought this up so I wasn't compelled to respond, but this is true.

"Creature" is simply another type of card.  There are Lands, Sorceries, Enchantments, Artifacts, and creatures.  It just so happens that creatures tend to be the worst kind of card.  That no creature has yet been restricted has nothing to do with not wanting to restrict creatures - no creature has been good enough to warrant it, although some have come close (Rector).  I beleive that time could be now.  The numbers, it seems to me, support the restriction of Welder.  However, since it isn't a key component of a dominant deck or a distorting deck, there are reasons against it as well.

[dicemanx]

I am totally with JACO and Hyperion on this issue.

The data presented in the article was too selective so this opinion piece has too much bias. If you present a limited set of data, there better be a very compelling reason for putting more weight on the results of those specific events in those specific regions (NE and Midwest). Furthermore, the data is incomplete. To truly get a complete picture of whats going on you need a breakdown of the entire event, not just the top 8. You also must make an assessment of the competency of the players that pilot the decks featuring the problem cards. I'm pointing this out because there is a LOT more to consider than just the top 8 decks of an event. One other issue that was not addressed was the fact that we are dealing with a short time period - let's see how the environment reacts and if we see the same kind of problem on a global scale over the next half year.

I also agree that T1 Welder is not remotely on the same level as T2 Skullclamp. As Hyperion pointed out, T1 is more adaptable and can deal with problem cards like this more readily. However, players are slower to adapt in T1 because of two reasons: they tend to be more content in netdecking/following what the strong players play/advise, and because they have the means to do so (10 proxy events) so they often take the "easy way out". It of course doesn't help that NE players love their control decks so something like Control Slaver appears in massive numbers.


Some other points: I totally don't buy the distortion issue. At all. If you stop and think for a minute, then all the powerful cards in the environment have massively distorted it. Drains and fast combo ensure that you cannot base your deck on high cc spells. Fast combo forces you to either play FoW to survive or have some powerful disruption like Trinisphere/CotV/Spehere of Resistance in the main deck. CoW and Trini have also forced out decks that run more than two colors. What Jdizzle calls making the environment "more healthy" by pushing it towards more basics/fetches I call severely distorting to the point where there are only two good control decks. No wonder Control Slaver is showing up in such high numbers - perhaps its the direct fall out from Trini and CoW, exactly what certain Canadians wanted to eliminate from the format 3-4 months ago? Let's see, what else. Ah yes, Oath along with ridiculously fast combo has pushed out aggro, including Fish, from the environment. Again, small wonder that Control Slaver shows up in high numbers.

In my opinion, you have such a hideously skewed environment because of Trinisphere, CoW, and Ritual (or whatever component of turn 1 combo we wish to focus on). Because of the "adaptations" to deal with those cards or deck types, you have created new problems for yourselves. You want to now do a complete 180 and hastily restrict Welder all of a sudden, without first asking yourself what happened in the past 6 months. Because as I recall, people were telling US that they were so happy with the environment and they didn't want to touch anything (Trini and CoW and fast combo components specifically). So what the heck happened? Why the dissatisfaction all of a sudden?

I, on the other hand, am personally having a blast playing T1 right now, and apart from the occasional game ruined by Trinisphere or a combo deck comboing out turn 1 (ie games where interaction = 0), the games are full of interaction and excitement. I also don't care if I face Welders in 50%+ of all of my matches. Welders simply make decks like Control Slaver, Stax, wMUD and 5/3 competitive rather than overwhelmingly powerful.

[dicemanx]

a problem developes with you get to the point where you are either running the card, or running an answer the card.

While this kind of issue might arise in T2/extended, T1 differs greatly because there is a 3rd option: you can simply play a deck that has an equally strong if not stronger game plan and just WIN. You don't have to base your game around controlling a supposed "problem card". Examples of decks that can do this without having to contend with Welder specifically:

Oath
Dragon
Tendrils combo
Landstill (Landstill sucks right?)
Salvagers combo/Bomberman (but this isn't a competitive archetype, right? Uh-huh...)
HyperMUD
4CC (this is a dead archetype, right?)
FCG
Hulk (cannot beat CS, right?)

[epeeguy]

While this kind of issue might arise in T2/extended, T1 differs greatly because there is a 3rd option: you can simply play a deck that has an equally strong if not stronger game plan and just WIN. You don't have to base your game around controlling a supposed "problem card".

I don't entirely agree with this, and it actually begs the question "If you are changing decks in order to beat a specific card, isn't that the same thing as playing certain types of cards to beat specific card?"  Maybe it's a stretch of logic, but it seems to me that whether you play a deck and add cards to it to in order to beat a specific card is not that much different than switching to a completely different deck.  Maybe it's a different kind of unhealthiness, but it seems to be a sign of it nonetheless.

But, that's debatable, and I don't argue that you can simply switch decks in order to be competitive and beat the "best deck of the moment".  Yet, I have my hesitations about whether or not that's really that good.  Certainly Vintage plays by wholly different rules than any other format; but it still seems that this may be something to be wary of.

[Smmenen]

I am totally with JACO and Hyperion on this issue.

The data presented in the article was too selective so this opinion piece has too much bias. If you present a limited set of data, there better be a very compelling reason for putting more weight on the results of those specific events in those specific regions (NE and Midwest). Furthermore, the data is incomplete. To truly get a complete picture of whats going on you need a breakdown of the entire event, not just the top 8. You also must make an assessment of the competency of the players that pilot the decks featuring the problem cards. I'm pointing this out because there is a LOT more to consider than just the top 8 decks of an event. One other issue that was not addressed was the fact that we are dealing with a short time period - let's see how the environment reacts and if we see the same kind of problem on a global scale over the next half year.

I also agree that T1 Welder is not remotely on the same level as T2 Skullclamp. As Hyperion pointed out, T1 is more adaptable and can deal with problem cards like this more readily. However, players are slower to adapt in T1 because of two reasons: they tend to be more content in netdecking/following what the strong players play/advise, and because they have the means to do so (10 proxy events) so they often take the "easy way out". It of course doesn't help that NE players love their control decks so something like Control Slaver appears in massive numbers.


Some other points: I totally don't buy the distortion issue. At all. If you stop and think for a minute, then all the powerful cards in the environment have massively distorted it. Drains and fast combo ensure that you cannot base your deck on high cc spells. Fast combo forces you to either play FoW to survive or have some powerful disruption like Trinisphere/CotV/Spehere of Resistance in the main deck. CoW and Trini have also forced out decks that run more than two colors. What Jdizzle calls making the environment "more healthy" by pushing it towards more basics/fetches I call severely distorting to the point where there are only two good control decks. No wonder Control Slaver is showing up in such high numbers - perhaps its the direct fall out from Trini and CoW, exactly what certain Canadians wanted to eliminate from the format 3-4 months ago? Let's see, what else. Ah yes, Oath along with ridiculously fast combo has pushed out aggro, including Fish, from the environment. Again, small wonder that Control Slaver shows up in high numbers.

In my opinion, you have such a hideously skewed environment because of Trinisphere, CoW, and Ritual (or whatever component of turn 1 combo we wish to focus on). Because of the "adaptations" to deal with those cards or deck types, you have created new problems for yourselves. You want to now do a complete 180 and hastily restrict Welder all of a sudden, without first asking yourself what happened in the past 6 months. Because as I recall, people were telling US that they were so happy with the environment and they didn't want to touch anything (Trini and CoW and fast combo components specifically). So what the heck happened? Why the dissatisfaction all of a sudden?

I, on the other hand, am personally having a blast playing T1 right now, and apart from the occasional game ruined by Trinisphere or a combo deck comboing out turn 1 (ie games where interaction = 0), the games are full of interaction and excitement. I also don't care if I face Welders in 50%+ of all of my matches. Welders simply make decks like Control Slaver, Stax, wMUD and 5/3 competitive rather than overwhelmingly powerful.

As the Gencon top 8 played out, the only talk of restriction was Welder.  That got replaced by other discussion, but only becuase that was what people were talking about.  

Again, I did not just choose the NE or the Midwest.  I had two tournaments in my data from the Virginia, which was the capital of the Confederacy (I.e. the South).  And again, I chose tournaments that I felt were of sufficient quality AND geographically disperse.  If the T1 Champs was held in Germany, I would have used that data.  I would have used the Worlds T1 Side Event data if that data was available.  If I remember correctly, it was a Welder finals and Randomizer and it was held in California.  

I definately care if Welder is in 50%+ of my matches.  I'm surprised that you do not.

[dicemanx]

Maybe it's a different kind of unhealthiness, but it seems to be a sign of it nonetheless.

So wait, metagaming or selecting a deck because it can beat the most prevalent deck in the environment is *unhealthy*? Maybe its a very good thing if we force people to be a little bit more flexible with their deck choices once in a while.

The issue of "health" is tricky enough already. It is based more on personal opinion and personal preference rather than being some objectively measurable quantity.

[epeeguy]

So wait, metagaming or selecting a deck because it can beat the most prevalent deck in the environment is *unhealthy*? Maybe its a very good thing if we force people to be a little bit more flexible with their deck choices once in a while.

If it gets to a certain point, then yes, I believe it becomes unhealthy.  If it gets to such a point where people are choosing to either play a card or play against a card... well, I'm not convinced that this is a sign of a good, healthy metagame.  I'm not saying that it is an unhealthy environment, just that I am unconvinced that it is a healthy one.

Yes, I'm hedging; but to be fair, things fluctuate a lot in Vintage.  While Goblin Welder might appear to be the problem card right now, if something changes, and it probably will, it might be superceded by some other card (or cards).  To be fair, I don't know that the format is or isn't healthy; I'm just saying that one criteria I believe to be a symptom is when one card dominates the choices people make regarding their decks.

The issue of "health" is tricky enough already. It is based more on personal opinion and personal preference rather than being some objectively measurable quantity.

I agree with you; what is "healthy" to one, is most definitely going to be something entirely different to another.  Which is why it is probably best to establish objective criteria, if possible.  To me, this is my own personal bar as to what I perceive to be a sign of healthiness or unhealthiness.  I'm sure that you have your own.

[VGB]

Restricting a 1/1 without any inherent protection and an ability that requires a turn to become active is inane.

[Vegeta2711]

If it gets to a certain point, then yes, I believe it becomes unhealthy. If it gets to such a point where people are choosing to either play a card or play against a card... well, I'm not convinced that this is a sign of a good, healthy metagame.

Hasn't Vintage always been about this though? You choose to play a card or you choose to play against a card. Consider this.

Mana Drain is a card you either play with or against. It curved the number of high-end cc cards you could run for years. Even now people still fear running into Drain with almost anything, because decks can abuse it more.

Crucible of Worlds and Strips forces you to have to play basics, win on turn 1/2 or play Crucible itself. You essentially are playing against it if you aren't running it or the ways to beat it.

Trinisphere forces you to run FoW, win the dice roll or play basics and hope you don't die.

These are just a few examples and only using singular cards without going  into combo and such as well.

And what can I say, beating a 1/1 red creature is a bit easier than dealing with the above. Not that I really care one way or the other.

[virtual]

I attribute to reasons for this. First, the first place deck had functional Welders in Hanna's Custody. Second, it was a very low turnout due to the weather (Virginian's don't handle snow very well - even the pizza joints closed!)

Less people leads to less welders is NOT good logic.

Furthermore, if you say that it is because less New Englanders showed up, then that just goes to show that these abnormal numbers of welders are representation of a New England Meta, not a global meta.  

-Virtual

[Smmenen]

I attribute to reasons for this. First, the first place deck had functional Welders in Hanna's Custody. Second, it was a very low turnout due to the weather (Virginian's don't handle snow very well - even the pizza joints closed!)

Less people leads to less welders is NOT good logic.

Furthermore, if you say that it is because less New Englanders showed up, then that just goes to show that these abnormal numbers of welders are representation of a New England Meta, not a global meta.  

-Virtual

For some reason people can't get past the geographic issues raised by my article.  It isn't just that people are complaining that I selected a narrow sample, but for some reason there is this overemphasis on the NE.  I suggest and advice that those people actually look at the data in my article and elsewhere.   Virginia is the home of Goblin Welder, in my view.  It is Richmond where Workshop Aggro first emerged in its current form (The Man Show).  Eric Miller's success with The Man Show at SCG I(Not in my data) directly had an impact on Gencon where Workshop aggro appeared the answer to Fish at both tournaments.  David Allen then broke out his 5/3 and performed well at both major Gencon events.   Workshop Aggro would have filled the top 8 of SCG Richmond II if not for Oath and still manged to put 3 players into the top 8.   It also shows how good SCG Richmond part three it was when Miller won with Custody.

Please don't assume that I am talking about Control Slaver - becuase if you are, you are missing the major point that Welder is in multiple decks.

[jpmeyer]

To be fair, when people were saying that Skullclamp was in every deck, it really was in EVERY deck.  I remember looking at the results from I think German nationals last year and there were 31 Skullclamps in the top 8.  I think Japan had 28.  That's a lot more than 20.

[Smmenen]

But Vintage isn't german nationals.  It is a Huge, huge, huge format and not played by the pros.  Given those circumstances, isn't 20 really about equivalent to 28 in that instance?

[kirdape3]

Steve, EVERY tournament had 28+ Skullclamps in it.  Every Regionals, every Nationals... it was played in even the control decks and the combo decks.  Tooth and Nail morphed into Elf and Nail and became the best deck in the format just because of Skullclamp.

[Smmenen]

Did you read my previous post?

[Razvan]

*sigh* Steve, your argument for restricting Welder is that too many show up in the Top-8, but did you (and others), not say that this is not a reason enough to restrict it? Otherwise, FoW and Mana Drain would be on the chopping block beforehand, correct?

You also say, quite correctly, that FoW and Mana Drain are the staple pillar of Vintage, and that alone should protect them from being restricted.

Why not add Goblin Welder to that list? Keep in mind that Goblin Welder doesn't just make Control Slaver and Workshop decks strong, it makes them PLAYABLE. Even in your 5-axis metagame, you realize the catastrophe of removing one of the vertices, don't you? Removing both the Prison and half the Control vertices will not just create a cascade of events, it will break the damn format in half. It's not a broken arm or so, it's a broken spine.

I move to declare that Goblin Welder is an integral part of the Vintage environemnt, and as that should enjoy the same protection Force of Will has, which HAS put up 32 copies in the Top-8.

[Windfall]

Steve, I do agree that Welder is insanely broken.  My point by saying "it's just a good card" was more to say "it's a solid card that can fit into multiple decks."  I was not trying to diminish his usefullness by using the word "just."

In fact, the reason I do disagree with his restriction is because he is in so many different decks.  If it were just one deck, then sure.  Again, I say, the other 56 cards in Slaver make the deck insane, and Welder makes it work.  Before MD5, Welder was doing his job in Stax and TnT and people were okay with him.  That was what he was supposed to do - help with countermagic and play tricks with Tangle Wires.  I don't think he was intended to take your opponents' turns or anything that busted.

In the end, I don't see how Welder can go and leave the format healthy, since you ruin a lot of decks.  I'm pretty close to playing Tendrils again (good players with Tendrils beat Stax and Slaver almost every time - Rebuild is insane).  Without any other options, Tendrils is just nuts.

[Smmenen]

Mark, that's precisely the reason I think it should be seriously considered for restriction.  It appears with alarming frequencies in top 8s for a card of its function.  I only say this now becuase I have carefully watched the data stream and find it alarming.  Look at the top 10 cards played in the format in my article - I urge people to read what I said closely.

*sigh* Steve, your argument for restricting Welder is that too many show up in the Top-8, but did you (and others), not say that this is not a reason enough to restrict it? Otherwise, FoW and Mana Drain would be on the chopping block beforehand, correct?

You also say, quite correctly, that FoW and Mana Drain are the staple pillar of Vintage, and that alone should protect them from being restricted.

Why not add Goblin Welder to that list? Keep in mind that Goblin Welder doesn't just make Control Slaver and Workshop decks strong, it makes them PLAYABLE. Even in your 5-axis metagame, you realize the catastrophe of removing one of the vertices, don't you? Removing both the Prison and half the Control vertices will not just create a cascade of events, it will break the damn format in half. It's not a broken arm or so, it's a broken spine.

I move to declare that Goblin Welder is an integral part of the Vintage environemnt, and as that should enjoy the same protection Force of Will has, which HAS put up 32 copies in the Top-8.

I have tried many, many times to articulate the distinction I am making and I did so in this article.  Read what I say about FOW.  

My concern is with cards that aren't FOW or Brainstorm or answers or lands.    I dont care if there are 32 Rack and Ruins or Red Elemental Blast per top 8 becuase they are a hate card.  

My concern is only when a card starts to show up in numbers greater than 12 per top 8, at which point it should be watched.  When a card starts consistently putting up 4 decks per top 8 or more, then I think distortion/dominance criteria I have written about at length begin to kick in.

[Razvan]

Ok, I get it, but the problem I have is that it is still a personal choice you make in which to categorize Goblin welder, differently than FoW.

The difference between REB and Welder is that, as you correctly stated, REB is a hate card, whereas the Welder is a main strategy card. But that's not the skullclamp effect. I think that FoW is an equally main strategy card as Welder (okay, the grammar in this sentence is horrific, but I hope you get whaqt I mean).

The real reason that Force of Will isn't a problem is seen by what would happen in its absence. T1 would be worse than the stereotype - it would make Extended in late 2003 look like a healthy format. Force of Will is the glue to the format and enables actual interaction so that decks aren't merely trying to combo out. It keeps decks like Meandeck Tendrils from winning.

I agree. I wholeheartedly agree. I just place Welder in the same category.... I think that's where the disparity begins. It does it differently than FoW, but I still think the format would be worse without it. Hell, I think that FoW is the reason why the format would be worse without Welder, since, Welder circumvents counter-magic. Without Welder, Mono-Blue would be the problem, and HERE is the cascading effect.

[Windfall]

Oh I agree with almost everything you say about it.  I just wonder what will happen to Type 1 if Welder goes away.

This is a time of tension.  Everyone seems to be disagreeing somewhere, and I don't want this stupid Goblin to ruin our community!  =)

[virtual]

For some reason people can't get past the geographic issues raised by my article.

Alright, welder is more than in just CS.  Granted, I was trying to head off what I expected to be your response.  


But could you address the other point of my comment:

virtual wrote:

I attribute to reasons for this. First, the first place deck had functional Welders in Hanna's Custody. Second, it was a very low turnout due to the weather (Virginian's don't handle snow very well - even the pizza joints closed!)

Less people leads to less welders is NOT good logic.

-Virtual

[Smmenen]

I don't see how it isn't good logic.  What its saying is that the better the tournament, the more likely welder is to perform.  If there is a nearly direct correllation than that is a perfect sign of format distortion.  

You don't restrict based upon a 20 person tournament.  But since we don't have a pro tour, we have to look at the larger more telling events.

[virtual]

I don't see how it isn't good logic. What its saying is that the better the tournament, the more likely welder is to perform. If there is a nearly direct correllation than that is a perfect sign of format distortion.

You don't restrict based upon a 20 person tournament. But since we don't have a pro tour, we have to look at the larger more telling events.

 The number of welders that show up at the tournament should shrink in proportion to the number of the rest of the cards that appear.  Assuming that  the people who didn't show up are bringing an even distribution of deck.  It isn't good logic because the percentage of welders that would appear in the top 8 should not change.

IF the people who didn't show up are bringing an uneven distribution of decks, that shows metagame distortion for the particular set of people who didn't come due to weather.  IF all of those people are from the same area, then maybe it's the meta of that area that is distorted...

-Virtual

[Machinus]

Wouldn't the best thing for the format be to put Welder on the watch list, thereby letting everyone know that the card is dangerously good? This would make it official and unignorable that welder is powerful, and ensure it's presence at least for the next three months. Since it would be so highly recognized, the metagame, and maindecks all over the US (analogous to the stax epidemic in europe last year) would shift in order to answer this new, practically ubiquitous threat. The format would do its best to answer the card, and if in three months then the DCI checks back in, we have not succeded in resolving the problems caused by this 1/1, then perhaps more serious (and permanent) action should be taken.

This is of course based on the premise that welder itself is the problem. Whether or not that is true, putting welder on the watch list could only have positive consequences.

[Smmenen]

I don't see how it isn't good logic. What its saying is that the better the tournament, the more likely welder is to perform. If there is a nearly direct correllation than that is a perfect sign of format distortion.

You don't restrict based upon a 20 person tournament. But since we don't have a pro tour, we have to look at the larger more telling events.

 The number of welders that show up at the tournament should shrink in proportion to the number of the rest of the cards that appear.  

SHOULD.  That's precisely why I consider Welder a problem.  As the tournaments become HARDER and of higher calibre with strongest competition, Welder performs better.  In scrubtastic fields, Welder may not have more than 4 copies in top 8s.  But we ignore the scrub results because it isn't helpful at telling us if there is a problem.  That's why Sylvan has a cut off 50 players per tournament, and I would use an ever higher cut off - say 100.

Assuming that  the people who didn't show up are bringing an even distribution of deck.  It isn't good logic because the percentage of welders that would appear in the top 8 should not change.

The more players there are, the better the chance is that there are going to be more elite vintage players becuase the tournament is a real draw with a great prize.  The Vintage Champs, the SCG events and the Waterbury have the best competition of T1 events I've seen becuase they have such sweet prizes.  You entirely missed the point, which is hilarious.  The FACT that Welders DO change in frequency suggests that the better the field, the better the players, the more likely Welder is goign to show up becuase the best players win with Welder -or, players are winning with Welder in the best field.  

That's the whole point!  That's the reason I beleive it needs restriction.  That you couldn't see that baffles me but hopefully it is clear now.

IF the people who didn't show up are bringing an uneven distribution of decks, that shows metagame distortion for the particular set of people who didn't come due to weather.  IF all of those people are from the same area, then maybe it's the meta of that area that is distorted...

-Virtual

Richmond was only one of six events I compiled.

[Mana Duane]

Wouldn't the best thing for the format be to put Welder on the watch list, thereby letting everyone know that the card is dangerously good?

Surely this would have no effect at all. Everybody already knows about welder and frankly if you go to a tournament without a welder plan then you deserve to get pounded by Control Slaver all day long. The format has been trying to respond, look at how many decks are now packing Lava Dart main.

Steve, thank you for a terrific article! I've felt for some time that if any card needs to be restricted it should be welder. It was nice to read an article arguing for the right card for a change, rather than all the misguided ramblings about trinisphere and workshop.

[epeeguy]

My concern is only when a card starts to show up in numbers greater than 12 per top 8, at which point it should be watched.  When a card starts consistently putting up 4 decks per top 8 or more, then I think distortion/dominance criteria I have written about at length begin to kick in.

I'm not sure you fully developed your other criteria though.  While a large presence of a certain card in the Top8 may be something to look at... I'm not sure that's sufficient to begin to look at it.  I'd also consider looking at what other decks are out there and what they're doing to compete.  This was what I suggested in terms of playing a card or playing against a card.  Nevertheless, what you suggest is still a good watch tool.

@Vegeta2711: Again, I'm only suggesting something that, to me, would be a cause for concern.  Certainly Vintage has certain tendancies to it that make it unique from other formats and decidely different when it comes to measuring "distortion".  However, even with the cards you mention there is always a lot of talk of issues with their Unrestricted presence in the format.  And certainly there is a lot of talk of their impact.  There may be something to that.

But, again, my point is only that this is a criteria that could be used.  It isn't, itself, a way to conclude anything; it is simply a diagnostic tool that could be used, in conjunction with others, to draw your conclusion.

[Saucemaster]

The number of welders that show up at the tournament should shrink in proportion to the number of the rest of the cards that appear.  Assuming that  the people who didn't show up are bringing an even distribution of deck.  It isn't good logic because the percentage of welders that would appear in the top 8 should not change.

You're forgetting that the smaller the tournament, the greater the variance.  In this case it's directly analogous to flipping a coin 200 times versus flipping a coin 2,000 times.  Your results are more likely to deviate from the mean with a smaller sample size.  So it's not entirely true to say that the percentage of welders "should not change".

Plus, what Smmenen said.