TheManaDrain.com
February 04, 2026, 11:17:41 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: [Lost SCG Tourney Report] Dead Last (Monetarily) at the 1st MeanDeck Legacy Open  (Read 4316 times)
freakish777
Basic User
**
Posts: 513



View Profile Email
« on: January 11, 2007, 01:04:27 am »

I sent this both to editor@starcitygames.com and to scouseboy@gmail.com (It's entirely possible that it will still get published on SCG as I sent it about a week ago to the scouseboy address, however being posted on the SCG website is more for the Pro crowd, and I'd like the more faithful Legacy crowd to get it in hand as well for the most and have it be of use sooner, as it's more so for them), and haven't heard from them so I'm unsure what's happening.

Warning:  This article is a bit long and fairly in detail.  If you don't like reading, turn back.

The following is what was sent in a Word document.

"Dead Last (Monetarily) at the Legacy MeanDeck Lecacy Open I"
[/size]

Legacy’s an amazing format.  I was pretty happy to hear Team MeanDeck of Vintage fame announce a Legacy Tournament on December 17th.  I’d been planning on m moving across the country.  I have the option to catch a plane to Rochester where I’m headed for $175, or to Columbus Ohio for $125.  Bus tickets from Columbus to Rochester were $83.  So, why not have a little less stress involved in moving and play some cards so I have something to look forward to.   

Quick aside: We don’t yet have machines that “think” on the level as humans because understanding thought processes is apparently a tough thing to do.

I look for someone to put me up for the night while I’m in Columbus and fail.  $90 Hotel room?  Awesome.  I do however get Lyle H of MeanDeck to offer to pick me up and take me to the tournament and to the bus station afterwards.  Lyle’s chill.  We listen to Credence Clearwater Revival on the way there, talk about Vintage, and how big of a nerd and scrub I am for stopping along the way to play a card game.  I also get to hear a story about how Paul Mastriano (another MeanDeck member and the creator of the insanely fun Type 4 Casual Format) is notorious for getting lost on the way to events.  We show up at the shop.  Looks like a nice place.  I get to meet Mike Bomholt (creator of Iggy Pop) and very very briefly talk with Doug Linn (that many message board posters may know as Hi-Val). 

I’m playing a variation on Chris Pikula’s Black and White disruption list from GP: Philadelphia better known as either BW Confidant or Deadguy Ale:

4 Dark Confidant
4 Nantuko Shade
4 Hypnotic Specter

4 Dark Ritual
3 Swords to Plowshares
1 Darkblast
4 Sinkhole
4 Vindicate

4 Duress
4 Hymn to Tourach
1 Gerrard’s Verdict

2 Lotus Petal
1 Cursed Scroll

4 Scrubland
4 Wasteland
3 Polluted Delta
1 Windswept Heath
1 Bloodstained Mire
6 Swamp
1 Plains

Sideboard:
4 Null Rod
4 Engineered Plague
4 Withered Wretch
1 Jotun Grunt
1 Swords to Plowshares
1 Darkblast
 
Some quick notes on card selection.  Lotus Petal for the most part was great when I goldfished some hands, letting me do dumb things like first turn double Hymn to Tourach or drop Dark Confidant on turn 1 without Dark Ritual.  In tournament itself, it didn’t really show up on turn 1 in as big a way as I would have liked.  I’m fairly confident that 1 or 2 is the correct number over some basic lands as it allows you to jump ahead in the match quicker, at the cost of cutting off late game options.  For the most part if you’re attacking with Nantuko Shade for more than 1 turn you’re pretty happy, the chances that a Lotus Petal not being a land costs you a game seem extremely small in comparison to the chances that it will win you a game because you got to play your spells earlier.  Darkblast is amazing against any deck featuring aggressive creatures of the Goblin, Elf, Wizard, Cat and Hound varieties.  The basic Plains was decent, not spectacular, but I didn’t feel it hindered my need for double black at any crucial times.  Aside from those I feel the only questionable cards are in the Sideboard.  Seeing as how the tournament was sponsored by MeanDeck, I decided that a handful of Vintage enthusiasts would decide to play bringing combination decks.  Seeing as how the bulk of combination decks in Vintage and Legacy rely on Artifacts to either produce their mana or kill the opponent, I metagamed with Null Rod in the sideboard.  Additionally Null Rod is an excellent tool against Affinity decks, and quite frankly as an Aggro-Control Deck, I can use the help against faster aggressive strategies in the form of gigantic tempo swings when my opponent’s lands don’t even tap for mana and their Arcbound Ravagers are incapable of getting bigger.   

Steve Menendian yells at everyone to quiet down and the Tournament Organizer announces $200 for first, $120 for second, $60 for third, and $20 for fourth.  Pairings go up, there are 35 people in attendance.

Round 1 against Jerry with 2 Land Belcher at table 17.

My opponent wins the role.  He looks at his hand and says, “I’ll try.”

Tip #1:  Simply announce “Keep” or “Mulligan” as a beginning player.  “I’ll try,” tells your opponent “I’m playing a combo deck that’s missing on of the combination pieces but I think I can put it together fast enough to kill you.”   

I subsequently mulligan to 6 under the assumption that my hand isn’t fast enough against a combo deck.  My suspicions are confirmed after he plays some artifact mana sources, and when I Duress on my turn.  It turns out he keeps a rather forgiving hand, as he can’t find his Goblin Charbelcher while I Vindicate his non-land mana sources and Wasteland both his Taiga and Bayou.  I eventually find a Dark Confidant and a Nantuko Shade, which kills him faster then he can re-build his mana for his 4-mana artifact.   

I board in Null Rod for Sinkholes seeing as how he’s running only 2 lands.

The second game involves him emptying all but 1 card in his hand on turn 1, and my turn 1 involving both Hymn to Tourach for his last card and Nantuko Shade.  Normally I’d be ecstatic for getting Lotus Petal + Dark Ritual into the double 2 casting cost spell first turn.  The fact that Hymn hit only 1 card though was a downer.  I attack with Shade; I find Hypnotic Specter and attack some more.  He plays Goblin Welder, I play Null Rod.   

Tip #2:  Try not to think that your hate card just wins on the spot.

He welds Null Rod for my Lotus Petal, finds Belcher and kills.

The third game he mulligans to six.  I play Dark Ritual for Duress and Nantuko Shade.  Duress revealed Tinder Wall, Lotus Petal, Pyroclasm (obviously sideboarded in), Cabal Ritual, Chromatic Star, and Land Grant.  I take the Land Grant to keep his mana down and to keep him from playing Pyroclasm earlier.  My second turn is Dark Confidant, who on my third turn reveals Null Rod.  Jerry concedes shortly thereafter.

Games:  2-1
Matches: 1-0

Round 2 against Darren with UW/r Aggro Control at table 12.

I believe my opening play here is Dark Ritual into Hypnotic Specter that he Swords to Plowshares.  He lays down some basic lands that make blue and white mana.  Around my fourth turn, I Duress him after he’s played Umezawa’s Jitte.  I see Serra Avenger, two Serendib Efreets, a Pyroclasm and Swords to Plowshares.  I take the removal piece that he currently has the colored mana to play and put Hypnotic Specter into play hoping he doesn’t topdeck red mana.  He does.  And plays Serendib Efreet.

Tip #3:  If you have your choice between playing a blocker and playing a removal spell for the creature that’s in play, play the removal spell.


I’m positive the deck he’s playing is being called Eon Red Apocalypse, and people are claiming it has good match-ups against Goblins, Threshold and High Tide – Reset decks.  That’s all well and good.  But none of that really matters when your opponent has 2 Vindicates and a Wasteland in hand and you choose to play your blocker instead of your removal spell.  I proceed to Wasteland his Volcanic Island that he topdecked, Vindicate his Efreet that he had been hoping to equip with Jitte and swing with Hypnotic Specter taking his other Efreet.  He plays his Serra Avenger, I play another Vindicate.  The game is essentially over at this point.  To be fair, Darren couldn’t have known that I had the answers to his line of play in my hand.  However, something that’s been reinforced in my play is that when you have the choice between a removal spell and a blocker, the removal spell is almost always the right play for tempo reasons.  In this scenario, it’s amplified because of the card advantage that I was able to achieve through Hypnotic Specter.  Maximizing your mana each turn is not always the correct play.

I sideboard in the one Swords to Plowshares for the one Darkblast.

In game 2 he goes to six cards in hand, Force of Wills my first threat, and puts down Meddling Mage on Vindicate, I deal with the Mage at some point and play another Duress revealing Brainstorm, Force of Will, and Serendib Efreet.  I choose Brainstorm, and then play Nantuko Shade forcing him into playing Force of Will removing his threat and getting me card advantage and virtual removal for his threat.  I could have taken Force of Will with Duress and resolved Shade in an attempt to race, I feel this play was wrong because he then is left with Brainstorm to find an answer to my Shade in the form of Mother of Runes (that I believe I saw game 1 as a last ditch blocker to a lethal Nantuko Shade), Swords to Plowshares, Jitte, Pyroclasm, or a string of blockers while his Serendib Efreet races.  I find another Nantuko Shade, and a Hypnotic Specter shortly thereafter to wrap things up.

During this match, I’m seated next to Spencer who is Darren’s friend.  He’s also playing BW Confidant, and begins talking about how he hopes that we aren’t paired next round because the mirror isn’t fun and largely reliant upon who gets the more relevant cards.  Great.  I haven’t tested the mirror.  I can only hope that what he just said is true if we should meet instead of misinformation.

Tip #4:  If you’re playing an established deck, don’t assume that just because you know the list you know what’s relevant in a mirror match.  Test it.


Tip #5:  Giving your opponents information about how your match with them plays out probably isn’t a good idea.  Unless it’s misinformation.  In which case you want to be careful as it could backfire if they’re able to deduce what it is you’re really after.


Games: 4-1
Matches: 2-0
 
Round 3 against Bob with UW Landstill (featuring Jotun Grunt) at table 1.

We each keep our seven cards.  I Duress him seeing Jotun Grunt, Mana Vortex, Brainstorm, Mishra’s Factory, Force of Will, and Swords to Plowshares.  Swords to Plowshares is obviously the correct pick.  I play creatures.  If he wants to drop card advantage to Force of Will a threat or disruption spell, I’m willing to live with that.  He Forces my next threat, and resolves 3 Brainstorms over a couple of turns (which I would think should put you way in front in a match) and a Crucible of Worlds as well eventually.  I hate playing against Crucible of Worlds when I pack Wasteland and Sinkhole, it’s one of the reasons I have Withered Wretch in the sideboard.  In any event I resolve a Nantuko Shade finally and get the chance to swing into 2 Mishra’s Factories while I’m sitting on 2 Swords to Plowshares.  He activates one.  I announce Swords to Plowshares before moving to declare blockers step, he activates the other, I play the second Swords.  I mark him down at 15 life, up 5 from a 3/3 Mishra’s Factory and a 2/2 summoning sickness Mishra’s factory.  When I look up from my score pad, he’s got both of the Factories in his graveyard.  I reach over and move them out of the graveyard to go with his removed from game Mana Vortex that he used to play Force of Will with and tell him that Swords removes creatures from the game.  He says he’d like to announce a take-back and Force of Will one of the Swords to Plowshares.  I tell him that I can’t allow that, and Nantuko Shade goes all the way.

Tip #6:  If you’re a casual player, slow down.  Read cards more thoroughly.  Take-backs are ok for casual play, but at tournaments most people aren’t generous enough to let you make them since they don’t have to.

If you find yourself continually making mistakes in which you had another play available that you see nearly immediately afterward, try playing where you don’t take back any plays at all.  In one of Mike Flores’ articles that can be found in Decade, he states that take-backs should be encouraged in the early testing period in team settings when developing a deck (largely for reasons of card recognition and proxies playing a role in errors, to ensure that the consensus feeling on the deck you’re building is in line with how good it will actually be when it’s fully developed).  While I’m unsure as to whether or not he still holds this opinion, I don’t agree with it (for the purpose of increasing and maintaining one’s skill).  Tournament Magic doesn’t give you the luxury of taking anything back.  The negative reinforcement of being punished for your mistake should help you to more quickly recognize the mistake and not make it again.

I sideboard in three Withered Wretches for the one Darkblast, the one Gerrard’s Verdict and I believe 1 Dark Ritual.

In game 2, I have a disruption heavy hand.  Regardless, Bob still makes Nevinyrral’s Disk on turn 4.  I figure I may as well force him to pop the Disk and put Dark Confidant into play.  A funny thing happens here.  He decides not activate Disk.  Dark Confidant ends up putting 6 additional cards into my hand, costing me 7 life in the process and attacking for 10 of Bob’s life before I’m forced to play another creature from my hand or be forced to discard.  Later on, well after the match I asked Bob why he didn’t activate the Disk sooner and he said he wanted to maximize the Disk and then start clearing the board with the 2 Wrath of Gods that were in his hand.  He eventually activated the Disk when the Confidant and the second creature I played swung.

Tip #7:  This game is interactive. You can only ever really ignore what your opponent’s deck does if you have a combination deck that makes whatever they do irrelevant.  For those of you that know what you’re doing this is trivial.  For those of you that don’t, the short of it is he spent 1 card to get rid of 2 cards of mine, but in the meantime I got 6 more cards making it +5 card advantage in my favor as well as +3 life advantage in my favor (10 points of damage attacking with Confidant to 7 points lost to Confidant flips).   

After Disk blows up I have a full hand and play out some threats, keep him off double White, and Swords to Plowsharse some Jotun Grunts.

Games:  6-1
Matches: 3-0

Round 4 against Nathan with Goblins/g at table 1.

I mulligan to 5.  Nathan plays Mountain, Mogg Fanatic, go.  Help?  I Swords to Plowshares a Goblin Piledriver but by the time I have my second land (which is the only land in play thanks to Wasteland) he’s attacking with Fanatic, Goblin Warchief and Goblin Matron, and the next turn the Goblin Piledriver that the Matron got will join Nathan’s team.  For reference my first hand had 1 Swamp, 2 Wastelands and 4 spells with double colored in the cost.  My second hand had 2 Wastelands and no other lands.

I side out 4 Duress, 4 Sinkhole, 1 Gerrard’s Verdict and 2 Hymn to Tourachs for 4 Engineered Plagues, 1 Swords to Plowshares, 1 Darkblast, 1 Jotun Grunt, and 4 Withered Wretches.

I keep a hand with Swords, double Plagues and Dark Confidant and 3 lands if I’m not mistaken.  He plays a first turn Lackey.  I endstep crack a Polluted Delta for Scrubland and Swords Lackey.  I play the second turn Dark Confidant, so far so good.  I play Engineered Plague on turn 3, curving out nicely.  I play the second Plague while Confidant marches into the red zone and draws me cards to put me further ahead.  Nathan cracks a fetchland for Taiga.  He drops Fanatic and has the implied “Resolves?” look on his face.  I tell him it resolves, and inform him that Mogg Fanatic dies to stated based effects immediately before he can sacrifice it.  He slaps his forehead, clearly ahead of himself, as he was happy to draw Tranquil Domain to deal with both of the Plagues.

Tip #8:  If you’re an experienced player, slow down. If you feel your heart/blood/mind/ideas/whatever racing, wait for them to settle down before making your play.  I remember making the same mistake three times at GP: Philadelphia and it costing me a game I had clearly won in one case and possibly could have won in the other two circumstances.  Had Nathan not made this mistake, it may have not matter, I was in quite a lead.  But the point remains, small advantages pile up, and the more advantages you create for yourself with tight play and rules knowledge the more likely you can role that advantage up into a game win.

After destroying the Plagues, he plays a different Goblin and cycles Gempalm Incinerator to kill my Dark Confidant.  The turn before I had revealed a second Confidant to the first one.  Had the Fanatic came down after the Plagues were gone, Nathan may have been in a better position to race.  I find Nantuko Shade and drop the third Engineered Plague to shrink the fresh Ringleader he just played.  On his turn, he plays Goblin Piledriver.

Things get exceedingly intense for a second or two when he attempts to cycle Gempalm Incinerator targeting Shade.  I have my basic Plains in play, and a Swamp untapped, before the Incinerator trigger resolves, I Swords to Plowshares his Goblin Piledriver.  I then pump the Nantuko Shade to help it survive the 1 point of damage its about to take.  He draws his card, uses Aether Vial to put Matron into play, which dies immediately, and then finds the next Gempalm Incinerator to finish off my Shade.  I draw Darkblast to kill his Ringleader.  I play out 1 more Dark Confidant to go with the one that’s been in play for quite some time.  The second to last turn I dredge Darkblast in my draw step and play out a bunch of creature to provide lethal.  He doesn’t have any blockers to play, and at 5 life I endstep Darkblast on my own Confidant to avoid killing myself in my upkeep.

Game 3.  Phew.  Time to try and win the high-pressure game.  The winner will be sitting at 4-0 with the right to draw into the Top 8.  Coming into the tournament I was afraid my Goblin match would go: Lose game one to ridiculously fast hands, win game 2 on the back of 1 or 2 sideboard cards and the luxury of being on the play, and lose game 3 because I’m no longer on the play.  So what really happens?  Nathan mulligans to 6.  He plays a first turn Fanatic.  I use some fetchlands to find basics and keep my mana base stable and take some hits.  I Wasteland his Taiga on turn 4 go to my second main phase and then play Engineered Plague.  He plays Goblin Ringleader and reveals Goblin Matron, Piledriver, and Goblin Lackey.  I take some hits from his now 1/1 Goblin Ringleader before removing it.  I play Withered Wretch and Jotun Grunt shortly afterwards and smash him down to 14, 8, 2 and game.  Jotun Grunt is a great card.  I would definitely run at least 1 more over 1 Wretch the next time around, though I very much like Wretch’s ability to respond to spells on the stack and gets better in the late game as he can eat entire graveyards.  In particular though, Jotun Grunt and Darkblast in conjunction is absolutely brutal against certain decks by killing their blockers allowing you to swing for four, and keep the Grunt around 2 or 3 turns longer because of Dredge.

Games:  8-2
Matches: 4-0

Match 5 with Mark Trogdon playing straight Burn.

I’ve been paired down.  Shoot.  I’m a little worried I could lose this match (as it’s very much not in my favor) and get knocked out of the Top 8.  I offer the ID anyways.  He refuses.  As it turns out there aren’t enough players for me to not make Top 8 after starting 4-0, so I’ll keep this short.

Game one, he keeps a one land hand, having not seen what I was playing, I Sinkhole it and proceed to have Hypnotic Specter number 1 and 2 go to work on his hand while he’s on no mana.  For those of you interested in playing BW Confidant, this is essentially the only way you can win against burn (by denying them their lands and getting lucky with the discard and a fast clock).

Game 2, the first threat I see is when I’m at 3 life.  Game 3, he mulligans to 5.  I play Dark Confidant on turn 2 in the hopes that he will burn it instead of playing greedily.  If he does play greedily, I hope that Confidant reveals an average draw of cards instead of 3 casting costs, and that I draw some Sinkholes for his lands to put him out of commission.  Alternatively, I hope to see a second black source (I played Confidant off Scrubland and Wasteland), and a Nantuko Shade to both race and to go with my Swords to Plowshares in hand to undo the spells he plays.  Game 3 is a total disaster.  I take 11 damage from my own Confidants (yes I played a second one).

Tip #9:  If your opponent can do a lot of damage to you, Dark Confidant’s value goes down.  I definitely made a mistake playing the second one (I got greedy), and may have made a mistake in playing the first one, or in not siding them out entirely.

Although this match wasn’t important to getting into the Top 8, it was definitely important as far as placement goes.  Had I won, I would have been first seed, and in the opposite bracket, as well as knocking out a bad match-up from the Top 8.

Games: 9-4
Matches: 4-1

Round 6 with Angel, playing Goblins. 

The top 8 seeds each have 12 or more points, while 9th place has 9.  If you draw you’re in (unless you’re daring and want to knock someone out, which the number 1 and 2 seeds could have done if they wanted to try, it wouldn’t have been beneficial for either of them though).

Games: 9-4
Matches: 4-1-1

Top 8: Rematch against Nathan with Goblins/g.

Game 1 I get double Hymn to Tourachs off pretty early and things are looking good while Dark Confidant reveals a Vindicate which I use to destroy an Aether Vial since he’s mana light and then proceed to swing with Confidant.  He rebuilds, playing out Matron, Gempalm Incinerating my Dark Confidant and playing Goblin Ringleader which provides more card advantage then I can handle as I’ve only gotten him down to 13 or so by the time he reveals 4 cards and gets to keep the Goblins.

In the second game I get a first turn Hypnotic Specter.  I ride him to Victory.  Well, and a third turn Engineered Plague that was in my opening hand.

The last game of this match I think involves me having 2 Engineered Plagues in my opening hand and Nathan getting a slow hand.  I play out Withered Wretch and attack holding back the second Engineered Plague as I didn’t draw a Wasteland this game yet and Nathan is sitting on an uncracked fetchland.  My creature destruction spells in conjunction with the Plague allow Wretch and a Hypnotic Specter to get in for all 20 points.

In this match Nathan is swearing up a storm, and rightfully so.  I’m fairly sure every game with Sideboards I had Engineered Plague in both of our matches.

Games: 11-5
Matches: 5-1-1


Top 4 with Spencer playing BW Confidant.

Spencer seems to know what he’s doing.  He does, however, have 2 maindeck Engineered Plagues to my Swords to Plowshares, and I have Lotus Petals which I think over a large number of games should give my build the ever so slightest of edges assuming proper play.  Having dumb Double Dark Ritual opening hands without actually needing 2 Dark Rituals in that hand should make me more explosive, and having Swords to Plowshares should give me a slight edge in answering his non Cursed Scrolls threats.  Spencer earlier in the day had mentioned that getting an un-answered Cursed Scroll was extremely good in this match.

In the first game, I open up with Dark Ritual, Cursed Scroll, and Nantuko Shade.  Nantuko Shade races in for 8 damage over the next 2 turns, but I’m unable to find answers for his Nantuko Shade after he Vindicates mine.

Let’s go back to Tip #4 shall we?

Tip #4:  If you’re playing an established deck, don’t assume that just because you know the list you know what’s relevant in a mirror match.  Test it.

Due to the fact that I didn’t test this match, and the fact that my list runs 1 less Cursed Scroll, I missed a play in which I could have endstepped Scrolled his Nantuko Shade, untapped and killed it because he only had 3 swamps untapped.  Due to the fact that I didn’t have enough time in with the deck in the mirror, my pattern recognition to see the play wasn’t there, I simply scrolled him and hoped for another blocker, Vindicate, or Swords to Plowshares to deal with the Shade.

I attempt to become clever.  I sideboard out Dark Confidants and side in Engineered Plague figuring I’ll have an unexpected edge in the card advantage war.  Turns out Spencer sided out his Confidants because from his testing, Confidant’s cost in life is too

Costly.

Game 2.  I mulligan to 5 or 6.  I didn’t write it down (or the fact that this was “Match 8”).  I double Ritual into Shade and Engineered Plague.  I attempt to name Confidant with Plague.  This is highly uncharacteristic of me (as is not writing down the number of mulligans and match number).  I’m usually very good about naming correct creature types with it.  In any event, my only land gets blown up, and Spencer informs me that he sided out Confidants.  There’s very quickly nothing I can do.   

Tip #10:  Bring more than a 1-liter of your favorite caffeine beverage and Ritz Crackers to a tournament.  I’ve decided that exhaustion played a role (no matter how small or large, as it’s somewhat tough to gauge these things after the fact) in my loss to Spencer.


Tip #11:  Don’t get too clever.  If you find yourself thinking, “This (sideboard) strategy seems risky, oooh but it’s so clever!” slow down and re-think at least once more.

I end up in 4th place, which is the last place for money payouts.

Games:  11-7
Matches: 5-2-1
 
Plane ticket:  -$125
Hotel: -$90
Tournament Entry: -$15
4th Place Finish: +$20
Bus Ticket: -$83
Having Fun while Moving:  -$293.
 
Some final thoughts on the tournament itself.  Considering the number of errors I believe to have perceived both from my opponents and myself, I can’t imagine any Pro players attending GP: Columbus in May not doing amazing.  I took fourth, and as stated at from the on-set I’m apparently a scrub.  Let’s assume the GP gets 20 times the number of players, pushing us to 700 in attendance instead of 35.  If my overall placement is also a simple function of multiplication, that would put me in 80th place, “just barely” missing Day 2.  Clearly, most Pro-players capable of getting the cards to play in the event should be able to do better than I can the event.  Three byes at Pro-Player’s Level 3 sounds appealing.  Appearance fees at Pro-Player’s Level 5 should make things a no-brainer.  Granted I happen to have a pretty good pulse on the format and have put in some time reading various message boards to stay up to speed, but the amount of time put in to do well by a Pro is miniscule compared to the amount of work opposing players would have to put in to up their game to the level of most Pros.  Considering most of you reading this aren’t Pro, let me say that if you or your metagame is comparable to the First MeanDeck Legacy Open, you need to sharpen your play up a bit if you want to prove that Legacy is a format worth Wizards of the Coasts time to support.   

After the tournament itself, a bunch of people go to a burger place called Thurmann’s.  On the way there, Paul Mastriano passes the exit we’re getting off at trucking full speed ahead in the left lane.  Lyle begins swearing and tells me he knew this would happen.  Considering his stories from earlier that morning, I believe him.  Lyle offers to try and find Paul and help get him back.  We waste a good hour trying to find our way around Columbus’s express-way system.  We listen to Pink Floyd.  This one song is absolutely great.  Lyle says that the song itself is better than sex.  I’m inclined to believe him.
 
Props:

Engineered Plague for showing up.

Null Rod for being a good card, had I made the finals, it would have come in to shut down Mike Bomholt’s Lion’s Eye Diamonds and Lotus Petals.

Lyle H for being chill.

Paul Mastriano for creating possibly the most amazing Casual format that lets everyone play their favorite, fattest Timmy cards.

Bardo for editing the holy hell out of this report. - Bardo, Wink

Slops:

Not testing enough.

Exhaustion.

TMD poster Caboose for not following through on his offer to put me up and avoid the $90 Hotel room.

Paul Mastriano for sucking at getting places on his own.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2007, 01:47:14 pm by Bardo » Logged

Matt
Post like a butterfly, Mod like a bee.
Moderator
Basic User
*****
Posts: 2297


King of the Jews!


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2007, 01:23:06 am »

Thanks for the top-quality report!

Which Pink Floyd song was it? There's a lot of good ones...
Logged

http://www.goodgamery.com/pmo/c025.GIF
----------------------
SpenceForHire2k7: Its unessisary
SpenceForHire2k7: only spelled right
SpenceForHire2k7: <= world english teach evar
----------------------
noitcelfeRmaeT
{Team Hindsight}
freakish777
Basic User
**
Posts: 513



View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2007, 04:22:17 am »

Thanks for the top-quality report!

Which Pink Floyd song was it? There's a lot of good ones...

It was instrumental, I'm sure he can fill you in, I'm actually not much into Floyd myself.
Logged

Godder
Remington Steele
Administrator
Basic User
*****
Posts: 3264


"Steele here"

walfootrot@hotmail.com
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2007, 06:49:11 am »

Quote
If you find yourself continually making mistakes in which you had another play available that you see nearly immediately afterward, try playing where you don’t take back any plays at all.  In one of Mike Flores’ articles that can be found in Decade, he states that take-backs should be encouraged in the early testing period in team settings when developing a deck (largely for reasons of card recognition and proxies playing a role in errors, to ensure that the consensus feeling on the deck you’re building is in line with how good it will actually be when it’s fully developed).  While I’m unsure as to whether or not he still holds this opinion, I don’t agree with it (for the purpose of increasing and maintaining one’s skill).  Tournament Magic doesn’t give you the luxury of taking anything back.  The negative reinforcement of being punished for your mistake should help you to more quickly recognize the mistake and not make it again.

For what it's worth, we've found takebacks while testing to be a key part of improving my team's performance. It's critical to know the right thing to do in common situations, and also to avoid silly mistakes, and making bad plays just reinforces making bad plays. If we spot a bad play while testing, we stop, examine the play and the board, and then take it back and continue with the right play. If you're continually spotting the right play immediately after making the wrong play, I suggest testing more, and playing slowly to force yourself to think about what you're doing.
Logged

Quote from: Remington Steele
That's what I like about you, Laura - you're always willing to put my neck on the line.
freakish777
Basic User
**
Posts: 513



View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: January 11, 2007, 12:43:38 pm »

For what it's worth, we've found takebacks while testing to be a key part of improving my team's performance. It's critical to know the right thing to do in common situations, and also to avoid silly mistakes, and making bad plays just reinforces making bad plays. If we spot a bad play while testing, we stop, examine the play and the board, and then take it back and continue with the right play. If you're continually spotting the right play immediately after making the wrong play, I suggest testing more, and playing slowly to force yourself to think about what you're doing.

That may or may not be worded in a way that isn't subtle (the quote of mine you used). 

To make it more clear, Flores states that while developing decks (particularly with the use of proxies) you should allow take-backs to get a clearer view of what the deck you're tweaking/building is capable of (I imagine to increase the speed of making the deck the best it can be in the shortest amount of time, and not short-changing yourself in the short run by saying "Oh it doesn't win" when in fact it's the player's fault for various misplays.

In contrast in the long run for one's own personal technical playskill, I feel (and have had reinforced) that not allowing takebacks negatively reinforces mistakes (ie, "I won't do that again") and that allowing them positively reinforces them (although not to the same degree, more on a subliminal level).  Practice makes Permanent.  If you allow yourself to make mistakes in practice, you will subconsciously allow yourself to make mistakes when it's on the line.  Your team may have hit a short run increase in skill (or in deckbuilding), but I would be interested to see the results with the same people over a longer period of time testing without mistakes.  As a side note I also think it'd be interesting to see just how much the deck you're playing vs. playskill matters (assuming you're talking about becoming better deckbuilders) against an opponent with better playskill.

Quote
and playing slowly to force yourself to think about what you're doing.

Exactly.
Logged

Anusien
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 3669


Anusien
View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 11, 2007, 12:46:46 pm »

One of the things I love to do in testing is at a critical juncture, ask my opponent for advice on the correct play.  I'll be playing versus Josh, and I'll show him my hand and say, "Help me make the correct play here."  I think while it's useful to remember that opponents make mistakes, when you want to test a matchup you want perfect play.

Great report, glad to hear the deck doing so well.  What are your thoughts on Smallpox and Tomb of Yawgmoth?

When you bring Null Rods in, did you take out Cursed Scroll as well?  Did you find yourself wanting more Scrolls than the 1 you ran?
Logged

Magic Level 3 Judge
Southern USA Regional Coordinator

Quote from: H.L. Mencken
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
andrewpate
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 483


EarlCobble
View Profile
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2007, 01:28:09 pm »

In contrast in the long run for one's own personal technical playskill, I feel (and have had reinforced) that not allowing takebacks negatively reinforces mistakes (ie, "I won't do that again") and that allowing them positively reinforces them (although not to the same degree, more on a subliminal level).  Practice makes Permanent.  If you allow yourself to make mistakes in practice, you will subconsciously allow yourself to make mistakes when it's on the line.  Your team may have hit a short run increase in skill (or in deckbuilding), but I would be interested to see the results with the same people over a longer period of time testing without mistakes.  As a side note I also think it'd be interesting to see just how much the deck you're playing vs. playskill matters (assuming you're talking about becoming better deckbuilders) against an opponent with better playskill.

I think that if losing games due to stupid mistakes in playtesting makes you upset and causes you to play better, you are not approaching your testing correctly, at least in the early stages (developing a deck or learning to play a new netdeck).  At that in point testing, you are more concerned with learning what the deck does and how it works than with winning; it does not upset me if I take a new deck off the PT coverage and lose 20 games in a row with it; I simply look back over the list, look at some coverage, and attempt to determine why my approach to using it is incorrect.  If I continue to lose, I may look for a different deck.  But if I lose due to mistakes, I might get the wrong idea about things, and those mistakes can be ironed out in the tuning stages later on.  Also, it can be assumed that a person will make few mistakes with a deck by the time he or she gets to a tournament with it if he or she is someone worth taking seriously, and that means that if you lose several games due to repeated mistakes you make playing Stax, your playtest partners will not have a good idea about how to play against Stax.  They will get used to winning because you play lock parts in the wrong order or forget to ramp up your Smokestack.  My team always allows takebacks during early testing, and we have gotten good results from this.  You simply have to maintain the maturity level to internalize your errors and commit to eliminating them even when you take them back.
Logged
Hi-Val
Attractive and Successful
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1941


Reinforcing your negative body image

wereachedparity
View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2007, 02:15:33 pm »

When I'm testing, we make liberal use of the "Actually..." step, much like one does if they have ever played Type 4.

Excellent report! It was good to meet you and shoot the shit.

And it's LInn, but you're definitely not the first one to make that mistake : )
Logged

Team Meandeck: VOTE RON PAUL KILL YOUR PARENTS MAKE GOLD ILLEGAL

Quote from: Steve Menendian
Doug was really attractive to me.
freakish777
Basic User
**
Posts: 513



View Profile Email
« Reply #8 on: January 11, 2007, 03:25:22 pm »

One of the things I love to do in testing is at a critical juncture, ask my opponent for advice on the correct play.  I'll be playing versus Josh, and I'll show him my hand and say, "Help me make the correct play here."  I think while it's useful to remember that opponents make mistakes, when you want to test a matchup you want perfect play.

Great report, glad to hear the deck doing so well.  What are your thoughts on Smallpox and Tomb of Yawgmoth?

When you bring Null Rods in, did you take out Cursed Scroll as well?  Did you find yourself wanting more Scrolls than the 1 you ran?

First to answer the questions, no, I don't like Smallpox in the deck.  It's nowhere near busted enough in the deck.  If you want the discard, just run Cabal Therapy (Pikula even mentions he wanted to make room for them just couldn't justify running them since he'd have whiffed all 2 days long with them not know what was in the format).  If you want a Sac Removal spell, run an Edict (ie something that doesn't blow up your land as well), if you want another card to blow up a land, you're simply not playing the deck correctly in my opinion (besides Sinkhole is essentially the weakest card in the deck, you side it out against practically every aggressive strategy).

I think there was one point I would have liked another Cursed Scroll, although that was against Goblins (Game 1 in the Top 8, in which I had a fairly nice looking position for a turn or two and then Ringleader gave him a Warchief).  I would be extremely cautious though bringing in a 3rd.  The chances that you have 3 mana floating around each turn just to activate 1 isn't exactly likely barring dumb double ritual nonsense.  The only time I actually brought them in was against Belcher and in that case it was pretty evident the Sinkholes were coming out as they were more likely to be junk against Belcher then Scroll was, including the events in which it's turned off.  Aside from that I would have brought it in against Affinity (and Sinkholes would have come out again, and the Scroll would come out for StP and Gerrard's Verdict would come out for Darkblast).  Also it would have come in against Iggy, and yes Scroll would come in here seeing as how I need lots of space for Null Rod, Wretch and the Jotun Grunt.


I think that if losing games due to stupid mistakes in playtesting makes you upset and causes you to play better, you are not approaching your testing correctly, at least in the early stages (developing a deck or learning to play a new netdeck).

Perhaps some of us intuit how a deck should play quicker and move through that stage of testing at a quicker rate?  Things somethings click.  Sometimes they don't.

Also to make things clear here, I'm not talking about just stupid mistakes (ie, Brainstorming and then blatantly forgetting to fetch afterwards, or blocking with your Meddling Mage when your opponent has a combat trick on the board and yes I've seen that happen), and I'm not necessarily talking about reasonably easy mistakes to make either (forgetting to roll up a Smokestack counter when you're new to the deck).

Now, for some honesty.  Losing any game makes me upset to some degree.  If I played a part in my own loss, I want to know how so I can fix it and not make the mistake again.  Perhaps the words "over and over" weren't the greatest diction on my part, I wasn't trying being self-referential there (if I portrayed it as such, my bad).  I was attempting to exaggerate a point so that my audience gets it, people make mistakes.  They make them in tournaments.  The longer you allow yourself to make them, the longer you subconsciously tell yourself "It's Ok."  To those of you without the same competitive spirit, good luck.  You'll need it.


Quote
At that in point testing, you are more concerned with learning what the deck does and how it works than with winning;

I view this as a logical error on your point.

Your argument is that the point of the deck is to win with it, let's maximize our potential of winning with it by short-cutting (sorry for lack of a better phrase here) by allowing takebacks to get winning with it as fast as possible.

My argument is that the point of the game is to win.  By becoming a strong technical player you increase your winnings in the long run (and hopefully at some point you've played enough archetpyes of decks that you can simply intuit the game plan of the decks you're playing and instead of it being 20 games where you "are more focused on how to play the deck" it's 5.  Yes, I understand that Pros that go to Worlds/PTs and play combo decks goldfish them some 100+ times on the flight).  I'm not entirely sure I'm making this argument the best way I can at the moment, so I might come back to this specific part of it later.


Quote
not upset me if I take a new deck off the PT coverage and lose 20 games in a row with it; I simply look back over the list, look at some coverage, and attempt to determine why my approach to using it is incorrect.

Precisely.  You can only chalk these losses up to 2 things.  The randomness (luck) of your oppoent topdecking Yawgmoth's Will while you ripped 3 lands in a row or.... mistakes on your part.  Again, I am not just talking about "stupid mistakes."  Mistakes include any action you take or don't take in a match that results in you losing.  It's that simple.  From "Oops I forgot to Madness in Basking Rootwalla" to "I walked into Daze when there was a lower percentage chance that waiting the 1 turn for the next land drop would be worse then what wound up happening with my opponent having Daze" all the way up to "I'm at 8, my opponent's at 3.  I have a Sacromancy token and Carnophage on the table and my opponent has a a 6/6 Wurm token in play and one card in hand (and no more Roar of the Wurms to Flashback.  I chumpblock the 6/6 Wurm and lose game 3 due to a bad read on my opponent.  All of those are mistakes.  Not just the obvious ones.  This game isn't just "See Spot.  See Spot Look at the Cards.  See Spot Play the Cards in his hand based on known information."  This game isn't just statistics.  And this game isn't just knowing people.

Quote
ontinue to lose, I may look for a different deck.  But if I lose due to mistakes, I might get the wrong idea about things, and those mistakes can be ironed out in the tuning stages later on.

They will get used to winning because you play lock parts in the wrong order or forget to ramp up your Smokestack.

This actually brings up an interesting discussion on choosing decks you know you'll do well with to begin with (and more interestingly how this intertwines with Team-testing and who's the go-to player for an archetype in your Team) so as to give your testing a head start.

Perhaps you shouldn't let them playtest Stax (either until they can prove they know the deck, or ever if they simply aren't cut out to play lockdown decks) when it comes time for some results, so as not to get inaccuracy.  It's not like Vintage is rotating soon anyways.

Quote
My team always allows takebacks during early testing, and we have gotten good results from this.  You simply have to maintain the maturity level to internalize your errors and commit to eliminating them even when you take them back.

The problem here is that, as I have said, these things aren't just conscious efforts.  Actions get events associated with them, and events have positive and negative rewards associated with them (in normal human beings atleast) that happen on a subconscious level.  When you play a tournament game of Magic, do you honestly have vivid images of specific games you've playtested while at the tournament?  Or do you simply say "Hey this looks familiar."  The positive mental reward (winning) becomes part of the event (the actual individual playtest game) and that gets associated with the actions taken during that game.  I don't know about you, but I only want 1 action to remember in my "Hey this looks familiar" scenario as opposed to 2 when I have to send electrical signals through the neurons inside my head.  "Commit to eliminating" sounds good, but I also am of the strong opinion its completely incorrect.  
Logged

SpencerForHire
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1473



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 11, 2007, 06:02:38 pm »

I found after the tourney that I would've liked to have had 4 Cabal Therapy in the sideboard to side Duress out every matchup for the stronger version (but I didn't want Therapy game 1).  Is this something that sounds juicy to you at all (assuming somehow you had the space)?

Also wonderful report, hope to play you again man.
Logged

Team Technology - Strictly better than our previous name.
freakish777
Basic User
**
Posts: 513



View Profile Email
« Reply #10 on: January 11, 2007, 11:51:33 pm »

I found after the tourney that I would've liked to have had 4 Cabal Therapy in the sideboard to side Duress out every matchup for the stronger version (but I didn't want Therapy game 1).  Is this something that sounds juicy to you at all (assuming somehow you had the space)?

Also wonderful report, hope to play you again man.

I would like to find room for 2 Cabal Therapy (probably not all 4) between the main/SB.  Gerrard's Verdict is mostly awful, I don't think I'd run it in Legacy again.  Seeing as how Null Rod came in once that day (and likely saved me against Belcher as my disruption and clock really mean nothing against "Empty my hand on turn 1, topdeck Goblin Charbelcher sometime later, kill you," I wouldn't have changed that decision in hindsight, but I knew that was completely a metagame slot (and I figured that a few MeanDeck members might be running fast decks with LED and that it was possible a group of Michigan players would come down with Affinity) and would be likely to change that slot going into GP Columbus (it will weaken your game against LED combo, and significantly weaken your game against Affinity, but I think there will be a much more diverse field at the top tables at Columbus).  Otherwise I was mostly happy with my list. 
Logged

Lyle H
Basic User
**
Posts: 129


SpeakAtLyleH
View Profile Email
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2007, 07:57:17 pm »

Thanks for the top-quality report!

Which Pink Floyd song was it? There's a lot of good ones...
each small candle.(sorry freakish the song I specifically mentioned as being better than sex is not actually an instrumental)

Roger waters solor work. the only version of it available it the live version from his 2000 In The Flesh tour.  It was supposed to be from an upcoming album that got pushed back because Roger began working on his opera which was finally released last year.  The album was supposed to see release after his 2006 tour was over but got pushed back again.

I highly recomend checking out this song, or actually the entire In The Flesh tour album. There are a lot of sublte enhancements/additions to some of Rogers older songs since he has had 30-40 years to build on those songs.  Small things Like in welcome to the machine after he say"and he played a mean guitar" instead of the normal chords being played behind a rise in the sound from the keyboard(sorry i dont know music so I cant use better terminology) he plays a cool little jig(im sure jig is the official term for it) on the giutar

In other news Im glad to see this finally got written.  Its been a while since this event so that might effect SCG releasing it(as well as it being posted here)

And for what its worth, I have found takebacks during testing to be a BAD thing, atleast for me.  Takebacks have a way of happening more often during tournaments if you make them during testing. I earned myself the name "bad playstyle lyle" because of the horrid mistakes I would make in my early tounament going days which IMO came from liberal use or actually step.  Since I quit testing with it, I have improved my playskill.

Lyle begins swearing and tells me he knew this would happen. 
loltastic

and ya it takes SCG forver to get to these.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2007, 11:21:42 pm by Lyle H » Logged

Team Meandeck
"When killing five just isn't enough"-Hex
Bardo
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 2257


Res Ipsa Loquitur

ibycus39
View Profile Email
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2007, 09:41:09 pm »

Wow, amazing fucking report. Really well done!

Quote from: report
I sent this both to editor@starcitygames.com and to scouseboy@gmail.com (It's entirely possible that it will still get published on SCG as I sent it about a week ago to the scouseboy address, however being posted on the SCG website is more for the Pro crowd, and I'd like the more faithful Legacy crowd to get it in hand as well for the most and have it be of use sooner, as it's more so for them), and haven't heard from them so I'm unsure what's happening.

A week? That's all? Heh. It's definitely a frustrating thing, but it takes anywhere from 3-6 weeks for my articles to run after they're submitted. Non-premium Legacy content is definitely not a high priority for SCG.

Quote
Tip #10:  Bring more than a 1-liter of your favorite caffeine beverage and Ritz Crackers to a tournament.  I’ve decided that exhaustion played a role (no matter how small or large, as it’s somewhat tough to gauge these things after the fact) in my loss to Spencer.

While this was a top-notch report, I feel this is the best piece of advice. Fatigue and hunger have undone myself and many, many opponents.

Again, great report.
Logged

noitcelfeRmaeT||TeamReflection - .gniyd ysub si ,nrob gnieb ysub ton eH
:nraw ot sevorp ,sdrow detsaw syalp nroh wolloh ehT
freakish777
Basic User
**
Posts: 513



View Profile Email
« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2007, 06:16:27 pm »

A week? That's all? Heh. It's definitely a frustrating thing, but it takes anywhere from 3-6 weeks for my articles to run after they're submitted. Non-premium Legacy content is definitely not a high priority for SCG.

...

Again, great report.

A week since I sent it to the scouseboy@gmail address.  3 or 4 weeks since I sent it to the editor@scg address (should have clarified).


EDIT:  @Lyle, ok, I didn't remember hearing any vocals, so I assumed it was one of their (many) instrumentals.
Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.09 seconds with 22 queries.