What would you play at Rochester?

[ELD]

I think part of the problem is that too often  people assume that they have the requisite playskill when they in fact do not.  As a consequence, they think that the only thing that matters is deck choice.  This is an illusion.  What matters is how well you play and plan for each match.  Skill is more critical to victory than pure deck design.  I have no quarrel with a thread that seeks to direct attention to deck sthat might be better in the metagame, but it obscures the reality that skill plays a larger role than deck choice alone.  This fact needs to be kept in view.

I couldn't have said it better myself even if I had better than my 5th grade edumacation.  When people talk about CS being dead, it's just because the players in their area aren't that good.  There's talk for a bit, then Rich shows up and owns a huge tournament.  People test decks Mean Dredge, and dismiss it.  The question becomes, how on earth did Steve T8 with it, when you can't even win your small local tournament with it.  I assure you it's not luck.  Type 1 is more about skill than anything else by far.  I've heard people of the opinion, that saying T1 is about skill is like saying Poker is about skill.  I couldn't find a more true and hilarious statement.  The people who make that statement are actually trying to say poker isn't about skill either.  Of course, this shows those people so deeply bogged down in the foul swamp of ignorance that even Yoda himself could not raise them up to see the light. 

The games we play are entirely about skill.  Long term, which is how we play this game, the best players put up the best results.  In fact, that's how we determine what makes a good player. It is certain that if you want the best chance to win a tournament one must follow Steve's advice.  Play the deck you are most skilled with, and have a plan to beat the field.  Dave Feinstein has done this countess times with RG beats.  He is clearly the most gifted RG beats player since he first printed Kird ape back in 1973.  His collection of power from winning with that archtype is so vast, that he could actually (with quite a few glue sticks) piece them together into a life size replica of a kird ape. 

TO DAVE FEINSTEIN!!!

[bebe]

but it obscures the reality that skill plays a larger role than deck choice alone.  This fact needs to be kept in view.

 I agree 100%. I remember testing out a few decks with dicemanx. He would beat me with either of the two decks we played.I couldn't win a game with either deck and he couldn't lose with either deck. Peter will pick up a new deck and play it with consummate skill. I need the time to familiarize with a deck - it can take me a few tournaments to start winning with it. I always place well with Mask decks because I know the archtype inside and out. Pass me a fish deck and I'm golden. When I played Tendrils Francais I managed a good record record because the deck was powerful but I made numerous mistakes throughout the tournament and in a top field would not have done so well. Now I can play it expecting to win. I am a better builder of decks than a player of decks - I actually was joking wirth Andrew ( reanimator) about just this. Both of us have wporked on archtype3s that others seem to win with more regularly than us. My skill lies in recognizing the synergies inherent within a given archtype and developing a framework for it. I cannot pick up a new deck and play it as well as Peter or some of the other better Canadian players. Yet I do manage to somehow top eight regularly - so deck choice is relevant  - but you will not win the whole shebang without considerable skill.