Withholding Deck Lists

[Lou]

After reading Nataz' post in the Tournament Reports and Results section, here :http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=29264.0, I also question the reason for withholding a deck list.

Does this stagnate the format, as Nataz says?

Is there any good reason for someone to withhold a deck list?

I understand that if someone works on a list, either by themselves or with a team, they want their technology to be theirs, but is that a good enough reason for withholding the list after a fairly large event, at least by Type One's standards.

Most events now, before top 8, allow you to see your opponent's deck list.  Should this alone negate someone's want for secrecy?

[Webster]

After reading Nataz' post in the Tournament Reports and Results section, here :http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=29264.0, I also question the reason for withholding a deck list.

Does this stagnate the format, as Nataz says?

The short answer: Yes.

The long answer: Forum boards provide the vast majority of public information pertaining to vintage. When someone has an idea, they present it in a post forming a thread which various parties critique the post. If the post is written well enough, making a convincing argument why this idea could find a niche in this format, then there should be enough discussion following to generate a successful idea. The same idea can be compared to tournament results, in that a high finish constitutes a successful post; it gets people talking.

In my mind, once you enter a tournament, your deck becomes public information. Just like a post online, it's there to be viewed, critiqued, weighed up, and either accepted by the community or tossed aside.

A withheld decklist means there is one less presented idea to talk about. What good are forum boards if no one posts, affraid to let go of their believed 'edge' over the rest of the format's competitors? No good


Don't be so self-centered when it comes to vintage. This format is more important than any one person, especially one who thinks that keeping their list secret is going to do anything special for them beyond MAYBE going x-1-1 at a stupid mox tournament. Grow up and take a few words from history to heart.

"Think not what your country can do for you, but rather, what you can do for your country."
                                                                                                                            -JFK


Web

[LotusHead]

If another event is going to happen within, say, 2 weeks, a decklist withholdal (probably not a word) is probably up to TO's discretion at said pilots request.  Such info could or should be withheld for a minimal amount of time. (2 weeks at most).

Maybe they only used 10 SB cards all day, or never really revealed the presence of a Volcanic Island except vs Scrub.Noob.dec and they really want to get their suprise on.

That being said, I would estimate, with no research other than following TMD, that about 1% of all decklists get withheld by request.  Usually for some reason.

That reason should probably be respected, as posting verbatim decklists isn't vital to game.

That player's opponents can say anything about what they want and noone can say/do shit about it.

Fact: I make it a personal goal to change at LEAST one card SB or MD no matter what (unless I was too busy.).Giv

Given 10 proxies (as is the norm in the USA), we have no rights other than to play Magic.  TMD/SCG/Morphling.de/RandomeNoAffiliationT1EventOrganizersLikeLunar. set their own rules.  Other than 5-12 proxies, we are all on same page.

Reasonable Decklist Withholdals should be granted.

EDIT: My arch nemesis posted while I posted.  ( would grant "Innovators: who REALLY WANT TO keep the decklist secret for a week or two their wishes.  But that's me, and I cited my unconfirmed 1% clause which may not have affected anyone anywhere...).

[Jacob Orlove]

It's worth noting that SCG publishes *every single decklist* played at each of their events. For smaller tournaments to post just the T8 is understandable, but if you're publishing the T8, you should include all the lists.

[Gabethebabe]

I´ve got no problem whatsoever with people withhelding decklists. If they´ve found new tech, let them reap the rewards in the next tournament as well.

This does not stagnate the format, that´s just bull.
Wait two weeks more and the information will be available to all. You can withheld information for just 'so long'.

[warwizard87]

Withholding decklists is moronic, not to mention boring. Who wnats to see look at a top 8 and see "deck withheld by request" you played the deck in a event live with it. Truth is its up to the tourny organizers to decide to withhold a deck. But i can't see it being a good idea for them to do so.

[Draven]

I have to disagree with pretty much everyone. Just because you play the deck, doesn't mean everyone knows all 75 cards and every interaction in the deck. I think it is very similar to a football game. You play the game, live on Monday night, everyone (and every team) is going to watch it, but that doesn't mean you post your play book on the internet afterwards for the world to critique.

[unknown.root]

Eric Becker, played in I'd say 5-6 smaller midwest tournaments with I.T. allways withholding his list from public knowledge. Even with our best guesses we could not get the right card count for each card for this deck. He wanted to keep the deck from going public till after the next SCG (which he double top 4) and there is nothing wrong with this. If you have some amazing tech and it wins and you wish to withhold the info to everyone outside of the judge that is great. However the judge should then respect these wishes and keep said decklist secret. If you some n00b trying to be cool by not reveling your 3 card changes to Cron stax, then thats just stupid.

Kevin

[Klep]

I share the opinion that after the tournament, decklists are public information.  If you really want to keep your tech secret for a big tournament, then don't play it until that tournament.  The TO is under no obligation to keep your secrets for you, and if he has the intention of posting any lists from the tournament, you should expect yours to be posted with them.

As far as decklist withholding retarding metagame development, it should be clear that it does.  The mere existence of a new deck that is being kept secret means that there is a deck to which the metagame should be adjusting but isn't and can't.  Thus, metagame development is being held back.  I don't have a problem with this to a degree.  If you develop some great new tech, you deserve a chance to reap the rewards of that development.  But that doesn't make it right to keep it secret for perpetuity; at least, not if you care about the format.

[forests failed you]

I agree with Klep here, if you play it, then the list should be pulbic.  Just like in every single other format where lists go public after the event/

[nataz]

That being said, as much as I <3 myriad, I think this

4th Place: Kyle Leith with Mono Brown Stacker - Decklist withheld by Kyle's request

is pretty lame.

If you play your deck in public, waterbury coming up or not, you give up your right to have a secret deck. If you want to keep something secret, you should be playing it in a closed setting, w/teamates, whatever, but not at a 45 person tourney.

I don't care about Kyle's random rash-port/metal worker/staff/karn/tangle-wire/smokestack/basalt.dec, but considering he played all the way though round 6, and then again in the top 8, it prob would have been pretty easy to figure out what he ran.

I could scout, ask a teamate that he beat (considering he was obligated at least once to reveal his entire deck to prove a kill and therefore save time), or simply looked to my left during round 3.

You don't see the pro-tour withholding decklists to keep certain strategies secret, nor does SCG do it with their power events. Withholding of decklists is not only selfish, but leads down a slippery slope; pigeonholing information and stagnating the format. One person requests, and you agree, but what if three, four or all eight do? Whats the cut off, and who decides when enough is enough?

If people didn't post decklists after events, there would be no such thing as a meta-game. Imagine if waterbury + SCG + Gencon didn't post anything but who won? Is this really productive?

I think its a bad precedent to set, and shouldn't be encouraged by what is obviously a top-notch and regionally important venue.

Anyone who can't see that the witholding of decklists stagnates the format is pretty much an invalid. People can disagree about the morality of it 'till they are blue in the face, but the equation of more decklists = more information = evolving metagame, and conversly no decklist -> no metagame change shouldn't be that hard to understand.

I'll even give you that its a sliding scale, the more information you have (i.e., all deck lists ala SCG) > top 8 decklists (i.e., Myriad) > top 4 decklists (no example here) > top 2 (still nothing) > nothing (I just like parenthesis). But to not realize that there is an effect?

This isn't an attack at Dan or Kyle. Dan is the best thing to happen to Northern NE Type I in years (not to mention being a general great guy) and I'm not gonna knock Kyle for trying, but the practice in general is ludicrous.

If you want your tech SECRET until Waterbury/Gencon/SCG, dint play it in PUBLIC until then.

[Whatever Works]

Well, I ended up posting my list. I really didnt see what the huge deal is because it happens very very frequently, and waterbury is only like 10 days away. Though perhaps I was trying to hold back decklist was so I could instead right an article about my deck explaining what it is, why it works, and applying general magic theory about the problems of traditional stax in a heavy mana drain, fast combo, Ichorid/dragon metagame, and possibly sollutions for a archtype that is currently being shunned by its sheer incapacity to thrive (in most cases) in such a metagame.

Kyle L.

[Moxlotus]

I don't like withholding decklists.  However, if the TO doesn't publish the decklists on TMD or anywhere I don't think anyone is under any obligation to post their decklist.  Small tourneys are a great place to try new decks in a tournament setting, which is why I don't mind when tournaments with less than ~20 players don't post the results.

[Dante]

...Though perhaps I was trying to hold back decklist was so I could instead right an article about my deck explaining what it is, why it works, and applying general magic theory about the problems of traditional stax in a heavy mana drain, fast combo, Ichorid/dragon metagame, and possibly sollutions for a archtype that is currently being shunned by its sheer incapacity to thrive (in most cases) in such a metagame.

Just because a decklist got posted doesn't mean you couldn't do/write about any of the above and still have it be a valuable article. 

[Webster]

I think it is very similar to a football game. You play the game, live on Monday night, everyone (and every team) is going to watch it, but that doesn't mean you post your play book on the internet afterwards for the world to critique.

This, in actuality, is false. Football teams record and watch games specifically to prepare against whomever they will be playing against the following sunday. It's a very common practice that serves also as a great metaphor: A football team's plays are like decklists, each one having the same goal (no pun intended) which is to score a touchdown just as all decks in magic try to win; the difference between each play, and likewise each deck, is the way in which you get to the gamestate of scoring/winning by various running maneuvers or card interactions. Once a team uses a play in a televised game, its out there for everyone to watch, replay, analyze, and so forth. All the information is out there as public knowledge; likewise, for a magic tournament, any deck that gets played should be available to the public for criticism.

Eric Becker, played in I'd say 5-6 smaller midwest tournaments with I.T. allways withholding his list from public knowledge. Even with our best guesses we could not get the right card count for each card for this deck. He wanted to keep the deck from going public till after the next SCG (which he double top 4) and there is nothing wrong with this. If you have some amazing tech and it wins and you wish to withhold the info to everyone outside of the judge that is great. However the judge should then respect these wishes and keep said decklist secret.

How can you possibly say that withholding a decklist is 'all right' or 'great'? The action is self-centered and petty. If you have some amazing tech and wish to withold the information from everyone, keep it at the kitchen table where you playtest with your team until whatever big event you're planning on stealing with it takes place.

The judge is under no obligation to respect a request to keep a decklist witheld from the public eye; it's in poor character to do so.

Well, I ended up posting my list. I really didnt see what the huge deal is because it happens very very frequently, and waterbury is only like 10 days away.

It's good that you posted your list, but saying that it's ok to do something which is considered wrong by a lot of people just because other people do it is lame. It's ok to skip class because all of your friends do it right?


Web

[Whatever Works]

Well, I ended up posting my list. I really didnt see what the huge deal is because it happens very very frequently, and waterbury is only like 10 days away.

It's good that you posted your list, but saying that it's ok to do something which is considered wrong by a lot of people just because other people do it is lame. It's ok to skip class because all of your friends do it right?


Web

No, you twisted my context there a bit. I never really considered witholding lists as a bad thing so I am not using the fact that others often do the same thing as an excuse, but rather as a way of showing that its an accepted part of magic.

I have seen lists witheld consistently from EVERY major type 1 team such as team GG witholding several different gifts lists before major tournements (most recently there repeal list). Becker witheld his list forever it would seem. Is it ok? To my general understanding it is perfectly 100% OK unless its at a major tournement. Frankly I dont consider myriad as a big tournement (though I admit it is extremely well run and reccomend it to everyone).

Honestly, holding back the metagame? I mean by what 10 days until waterbury? Frankly, 1 or 2 people playing this list at an event shouldnt alter the plans of very many people. Excuse me for wanting to leave even the smallest amount of suprise factor at a tournment thats less then 2 weeks away. You would think that coming up with something slightly innovative instead of netdecking CS/Gifts/SS would be grounds for deserving at least a little suprise factor. Oh well, my list is different w/e.

Overall, this is first time I EVER asked to withold a list, and I am more ennoyed that people are getting on me for something that happens with OTHER people consistently and they never get mentioned. I posted my list after the first complaint so I am not sure why there is still any kind of focus on me.
 
Kyle L.

[warwizard87]

iIthink the focus is more on the whole thought proccess of withholding decklists. Some one just happend to make a post about it when you did it.

[Vegeta2711]

No, you twisted my context there a bit. I never really considered witholding lists as a bad thing so I am not using the fact that others often do the same thing as an excuse, but rather as a way of showing that its an accepted part of magic.

It's NOT accepted though. In no other format do you ever see 'Decklist Withheld' and you NEVER see that at any major Vintage tournament, so why should the smaller ones get a pass?

Honestly, holding back the metagame? I mean by what 10 days until waterbury? Frankly, 1 or 2 people playing this list at an event shouldnt alter the plans of very many people. Excuse me for wanting to leave even the smallest amount of suprise factor at a tournment thats less then 2 weeks away. You would think that coming up with something slightly innovative instead of netdecking CS/Gifts/SS would be grounds for deserving at least a little suprise factor. Oh well, my list is different w/e.

Frankly if you thought it was that small a concern, you should have no issue with the list being posted then. And you're correct, you totally deserve suprise factor up to the point you play it at a public tournament. It's not any of our faults that you chose to play your deck 10 days before Waterbury, but then want to cry about keeping it sekrit.

It's good that you posted your list, but saying that it's ok to do something which is considered wrong by a lot of people just because other people do it is lame. It's ok to skip class because all of your friends do it right?

QFT

[Draven]

I think it is very similar to a football game. You play the game, live on Monday night, everyone (and every team) is going to watch it, but that doesn't mean you post your play book on the internet afterwards for the world to critique.

This, in actuality, is false. Football teams record and watch games specifically to prepare against whomever they will be playing against the following sunday. It's a very common practice that serves also as a great metaphor: A football team's plays are like decklists, each one having the same goal (no pun intended) which is to score a touchdown just as all decks in magic try to win; the difference between each play, and likewise each deck, is the way in which you get to the gamestate of scoring/winning by various running maneuvers or card interactions. Once a team uses a play in a televised game, its out there for everyone to watch, replay, analyze, and so forth. All the information is out there as public knowledge; likewise, for a magic tournament, any deck that gets played should be available to the public for criticism.

Although I do see the point you are trying to make, it is not correct. You look at a deck as a play in a playbook, however, I believe the entire deck is the playbook and each card is a seperate play.

Football games are televised and like we agreed all the teams are watching the game and taking notes about what plays are run, what formations are being used to set up what plays etc. However, those that watch the game do not get to see every play in the play book, only the plays that are run.

Even if someone watches our entire tournament, they may or may not have seen every card. For sure any given opponant probably won't see every card (unless you are playing Oath or Staff or something.)

My point is, I do not think an entire deck list is public knowledge. Yes, withholding a deck list may hinder the growth and diversity to Vintage, I do agree with that. So one who wants what is best for the format would/should feel morally obligated to share their decklist, but it is not nessessarily something that has to be done if the creator of the deck doesn't want to.

[nataz]

Just for the record, I never meant this as a personal attack against the store or Kyle. Dan and Myriad games are about as excellent as excellent comes, I have never see anyone work harder and it shows. Kyle, while I don't know him all that well, seems like a stand-up guy, and I'm not gonna knock him for trying to keep it a secret.

To be fair, witholding decklists in vintage does have some historical context. The GG's, Meandeck, shortbust (...witheld sex for 2 months!) etc. have all done it. I'm just pointing out that Vintage is the only place that it does happen, and it shouldn't.

It's a bit of a gray area, and people are going to try and exploit it. I'm glad my post was noticed because now hopefully we can get a better community concensus.

P.S.
sinter klashka,
bona bona bona!

[Webster]

No, you twisted my context there a bit. I never really considered witholding lists as a bad thing so I am not using the fact that others often do the same thing as an excuse, but rather as a way of showing that its an accepted part of magic.

Witholding a decklist sure isn't a good thing, therefore, it is either neutral or bad. If a poll were taken among vintage players that actually cared about the format instead of people whom are indifferent, I am confidant that the results would indicate witholding a decklist is bad.

I have seen lists witheld consistently from EVERY major type 1 team such as team GG witholding several different gifts lists before major tournements (most recently there repeal list). Becker witheld his list forever it would seem. Is it ok? To my general understanding it is perfectly 100% OK unless its at a major tournement. Frankly I dont consider myriad as a big tournement (though I admit it is extremely well run and reccomend it to everyone).

No, witholding a list is not ok. If a tournament organizer posts decklists for an event that they ran, regardless of the size, there should be nothing missing from the group of lists that were posted. I don't see where you get the notion that there is a distinction between what's ok to do at a major tournament compared to one that isn't.

Honestly, holding back the metagame? I mean by what 10 days until waterbury? Frankly, 1 or 2 people playing this list at an event shouldnt alter the plans of very many people. Excuse me for wanting to leave even the smallest amount of suprise factor at a tournment thats less then 2 weeks away. You would think that coming up with something slightly innovative instead of netdecking CS/Gifts/SS would be grounds for deserving at least a little suprise factor. Oh well, my list is different w/e.

If you wanted to truely have suprise factor, you should have kept that hyperMUD list in the bag for another 10 days and just tested matchups with a friend. Sure, the deck may not be CS/Gifts/SS, but that doesn't change anything; it's still a deck that made top 8 at a tournament whose decklists were posted on the internet.

Overall, this is first time I EVER asked to withold a list, and I am more ennoyed that people are getting on me for something that happens with OTHER people consistently and they never get mentioned. I posted my list after the first complaint so I am not sure why there is still any kind of focus on me.

Honestly, I don't have the time or desire to scour TMD and SCG forums for people who asked for their decklists to be witheld so I can start some internet witch hunt. The fact is, someone did notice with you, started a post, and people replied. No one is out to get you; "Yea, that Kyle guy... he's gotta go down." It's nothing of the sort. You, unfortunately, are just being used as an example which is a bad beat for you. That is all.


Web

[netherspirit]

I think people should be allowed to withhold decklists, as I'm sure all of you know, we as players put a lot of time and money into fine tuning and building our decks so that we feel they are the best they can be. If those lists go on the net people can just steal all that work you've put into the deck and end up getting more credit than they deserve. A deck signifies the time and energy devoted to building it, and I personally feel it's unfair that people can gain access to that at the click of a button.

[Webster]

I think people should be allowed to withhold decklists, as I'm sure all of you know, we as players put a lot of time and money into fine tuning and building our decks so that we feel they are the best they can be. If those lists go on the net people can just steal all that work you've put into the deck and end up getting more credit than they deserve. A deck signifies the time and energy devoted to building it, and I personally feel it's unfair that people can gain access to that at the click of a button.

We live in an age of public information. Welcome to the internet.

I like to believe that people are honest. If someone does well with a list that they did not create, I believe that they will pass the credit down to where it is due.

It isn't unfair to be able to have access to information derived from a source other than a person's own mind. Remember, the path of enlightenment is not as clear to some people compared to others. If no information were shared about vintage, there would be a lot more awful decks sporting thermokarst and tephraderm.

Hindering vintage in the name of self-glory is outragous.


Web

[Zherbus]

Considering the insane amount of time I've been away from the game now, I think people should be open about it. The decks mostly haven't changed since I've stopped. If that means that teams aren't putting their heads together enough, I think the format could evolve more with letting more people have stabs at improving ideas. Honestly, there hasn't been a suprise factor that'd paid off in quite a while. People show up to big events to unleash hell-on-60-cards, and after two rounds the entire building knows what is being played and noones all that impressed.

I'm not so much against people hiding stuff because I think the world will be a better place, but from my limited perspective it's not worth it. In retrospect, the last few months of playing and keeping things under wraps were just silly. Ooooh! A 4th one of those! Ooooh, 3 of those in the SB! Ooooh a deck that kills turn 1, but loses to itself just as often! In the last example, I'd (we'd) have been better off just hashing it out in the open and let people try it out for us at 25-man tournaments. In the other examples, it was just good refinement. Nothing top secret I had to worry about the Russians stealing from my laboratory.

[netherspirit]

We live in an age of public information. Welcome to the internet.

Yes I know. I'm just saying that people should be allowed to withhold a list if they feel that they want to.

People have mentioned about this hindering Vintage, but I must confess that I disagree. Whilst I'll admit that the decks may not be as powerful (which wouldn't matter at all in my opinion, their power in comparison to EACH OTHER is what matters), there would be more decks available to play because not everyone would be playing the "top" ones, people would have to actually think for themselves and come up with new ideas.

[nataz]

@ nether

If you want to have an argument about netdecks, perhaps competitive magic is not the place for you.

It's gonna be tough to test a new idea in any format that doesn't have a moderately defined meta-game. Meta-games are defined by what people play, and we know what people play when decklists are posted. This is much more important on a regional/national level then a local level because while I may be aware of what people are playing in NE from first hand knowledge, someone from out west/Europe may not have the same luxury, and viceversa.

[ErkBek]

I see no problem in withholding decklist at small events, however they should be released after a large events. Some stores post t8's all the time, others don't. What if your local store doesn't post decklist and you can keep your innovation on the DL? By some people's argument, this is wrong and that you are not pushing the format.

Making a new deck that wins tournaments is not easy. It requires a lot of work. I think it is totally acceptable for you to be allowed to keep your deck rogue for some time. If you put hours and hours of work into the deck, how is it fair to the deckbuilder if there "rogue" deck is suddenly not so rogue after 1 small event?

Aren't you supposed to be rewarded for innovating?

I share the opinion that after the tournament, decklists are public information.  If you really want to keep your tech secret for a big tournament, then don't play it until that tournament.  The TO is under no obligation to keep your secrets for you, and if he has the intention of posting any lists from the tournament, you should expect yours to be posted with them.

How does anyone agree with this post? Everyone knows that before taking a deck to a big event you should give it a trial run at a smaller tourney. However, according to you and apparently everyone else, you should just run your deck in a big event with out having the sufficient testing that a small tournament brings.

Hindering vintage in the name of self-glory is outragous.

WTF, this is a game.

[pyr0ma5ta]

You ARE rewarded for innovating.  You go home with a mox, and then everyone and their mother netdecks your insane list and makes it better.  Is that not reward enough?

[Yare]

Generally, I think TO's of unsanctioned tournaments should have the policy up front before the tournament and stick to it.  That being said, the public doesn't have to like a TO's policy of honoring "don't post decklist" requests.  Although, who isn't going to attend a tournament over that?  Nobody, except people who really, really want to guard their secrets.  As long as the policy is in effect before the tournament starts (perhaps a "check the box if you don't want your decklist revealed" option), then all is fair.

Their tournament, their rules.  If you don't like them, don't play.  There really isn't much more to it.  I really don't see the big deal.

Regarding "innovation and type 1" and "self-glory" and "selfishness" and all this stuff:  People who want to have their own lists withheld are selfish.  People who want others to reveal their decklists when they don't want to are also selfish.  Please don't call the kettle black. *not directed at anybody in particular*

[Webster]

I see no problem in withholding decklist at small events, however they should be released after a large events. Some stores post t8's all the time, others don't. What if your local store doesn't post decklist and you can keep your innovation on the DL? By some people's argument, this is wrong and that you are not pushing the format.

If a TO doesn't post lists after a tournament it's his/her mistake; apathy on the TO's part as far as posting results is unfortunate, but when it comes down to it, they might just not give a damn or considered doing it in the first place. I hold TO's in a different light than people who just play at tournaments. If it weren't for TO's, there would be a lot less tournaments in the first place so I have to give them a bit of slack; they work hard for us, some more than others, and I am thankful for it.

If no lists were posted for an event, I don't feel that there is an obligation to reveal your 'tech'. Eventually there will be an event that posts lists, like all should, and whatever gem a person has discovered will finally be revealed. Requesting a decklist be witheld from publication is different in my mind.

Making a new deck that wins tournaments is not easy. It requires a lot of work. I think it is totally acceptable for you to be allowed to keep your deck rogue for some time. If you put hours and hours of work into the deck, how is it fair to the deckbuilder if there "rogue" deck is suddenly not so rogue after 1 small event?

Aren't you supposed to be rewarded for innovating?

A deck is rogue until someone places highly with it. At that point it should be weighed by the community and either acknowledged as a good viable deck, a fluke, or an underdeveloped deck. People get their innovation rewarded by winning. They go home with a mox like pyromasta said. It's as plain and simple as that. If they want to actively hide their deck from the public afterwards in an attempt to overmilk it, shame on them.

I share the opinion that after the tournament, decklists are public information.  If you really want to keep your tech secret for a big tournament, then don't play it until that tournament.  The TO is under no obligation to keep your secrets for you, and if he has the intention of posting any lists from the tournament, you should expect yours to be posted with them.

How does anyone agree with this post? Everyone knows that before taking a deck to a big event you should give it a trial run at a smaller tourney. However, according to you and apparently everyone else, you should just run your deck in a big event with out having the sufficient testing that a small tournament brings.

False. The whole point of a team is to mimic a tournament setting, but in secret. Team testing prepares a deck for a tournament, in which afterwards, the deck is public and should be treated as such. Is there such a thing as a "small mox tournament"?

Hindering vintage in the name of self-glory is outragous.

WTF, this is a game.

You're right, this is a game. I love this game. I love this format. I think it's damn amazing. I want to make it the best that it can possibly be because I enjoy it. I believe public information leads to a healthier format, better tournaments, and an overall higher level of play. Hiding a deck once it's been played from the community goes against what I believe in.


Web