Story Time with Forcefieldyou; Don't despair... Get there!

[forests failed you]

I played at the Meandeck open this weekend, and I played one particular game in the top eight that I think was extremely interesting.  Especially, if you are looking at the perspective of actually 'playing' the game of Magic the Gathering.  I would like to share it with the community, in particular with newer players, because I feel that there are a lot of lessons that can be learned from the play of this particular game. 

The main lesson in this story is that:  You can win games with playskill, and that you CAN win games even when your opponent has better cards than you.  As much as people down play the importance of skill, in comparision to luck, brokeness and 'having the nuts'; it is possible to find a way to win.  This is one such tale.  Although, this tale may appear to be absurd, it actually happened.  My opponent had made it all the way to top four, in a field full of good players so I can only assume he was a decent player. 

And away we go.

I'm playing Burning Slaver against Meandeck Gifts in the Quarter finals. 

My opening hand is something like:

Mana Drain
Mana Drain
Force of Will
Underground Sea
Volcanic Island
Mana Vault
Sundering Titan

Its not great but its a keeper because I am on the play.

I play an Underground Sea and the Vault and pass.

My opponent plays a Polluted Delta, Lotus petal,  and Merchant Scrolls up Ancestral Recall.  And Passes

On turn two:  I draw another Mana Drain, play my Volcanic Island and pass. 
My opponent plays a Volcanic Island,, Merchant Scrolls for Misdirection.  He thinks about playing Ancestral Recall by elects not to.

From this... I can infer two things.  1.  He may be holding a Mana Drain, because he wants to untap before he casts Recall.  Probably on my end step.  2.  He has put me on having a Mana Drain.

I untap and Draw Mox Pearl (not so helpful) and miss my land drop and pass.  I am now behind and losing.  I can't cast my Brainstorm because if I don't hit a land I am surely doomed.  However, by not playing Brainstorm I am signaling my opponet that my hand might be weak and that I don't have any business.  So the hope is that he will try and go off allowing me to resolve a Mana Drain and getting my Sundering Titan down as soon as possible.
 
Here is where things get out of control.

He plays a land and a Mox Pearl and passes.

His board is at the moment.   Island, Volcanic Island, Underground Sea,
To my Board of:  Underground Sea, Volcanic Island, Mana Vault

I draw for the turn and get Gorilla Shaman.  OH NO, we are in big trouble now.  I pass the turn and on my endstep he plays Ancestral Recall.  Knowing that a Drain on Ancestral Recall will not allow me to cast my Sundering Titan, I elect to play Force of Will pitching one of my 3 Mana Drains.  He responds by casting Mana Drain on my Force of WIll.  I resond by casting Mana Drain on his Mana Drain.  And, he has a Blue Card plays Misdirection removing Mana Drain on my Mana Drain.

I am in big trouble.  He has just resolved Recall.  I am tapped out and completely unable to defend myself.  And, he has five colorless mana floating.  Uh-oh.

He untapps.  Plays a land and uses four of the floating Mana to cast Gifts Ungiven.  He gets  Time Walk, Recoup, Yawgmoth's Will and Demonic Tutor.  I choose Yawgmoth's WIll and Demonic Tutor and they go to the bin.  I am dead.  The game is over.  Let's move on to game two.  Right?  Wrong, I win this game.

He has an untapped Underground Sea, Island, Volcanic Island, and Pearl and one mana floating.  He has enough mana for the  of Recouping Demonic Tutor, and Walking.  But he has tapped wrong and doesn't have black.  Pretty lucky.  Of course, I calmly point this fact out to him by asking why he tapped the Underground Sea to cast Gifts?  He responds that it was a mistake.  I reply that it may have cost him the game.  (which highlights the possible strength of my hand...)

 So he Elects to play Time Walk, for an untap step.

He untaps with Five Mana.  He can do lots of things.  He can Recoup Demonic Tutor and get a Gifts, or a Lotus and try and go off next turn.  Pretty much anything he gets will make his hand and board far superior to mine.  I have two lands and a Vault.  And two cards in hand Sundering Titan and Mana Drain.  He has five cards in hand, Four lands in play and a Mox. 

Strategically the best thing you can do when you are tactically overwhelmed is attack.  But how can one attack when they have no way to attack?  I can't play my Titan, and Drain doesn't exactly beat down.  Here's how.  He had plenty of time to do whatever he wanted.  Set up a second Gifts et cetera. 

What I did was bluff on the strength of my hand.  My hand was weak.  But he didn't know that.  Never at any time during that entire course of events did I lead on that my hand was anything less than, untap win good.  Even though his board and hand were dominant he began to fear my position as I sat there eagerly waiting to untap and cast my Tinker and Recall.  The key here for newer players is not to look defeated, even if you are.  If you look confident and are being attentive to the game, asking questions, staying involved, your opponent has no reason to believe that you are actually beaten.  And has to begin to question his plays that will easily win the game...  "Can I tap out here and Recoup Demonic Tutor?"  Is he going to Tinker for Slaver?  Et Cetera.

Which leads me to my next point.

The power of suggestion is really powerful:

While he is thinking about whether or not he can tap out to recoup Demonic Tutor, I ask him:  "So you Recoup the Demonic Tutor, right?"  In a very calm and cool way.  Suggesting to him that he should Recoup the Demonic Tutor.  He reads into this that I WANT HIM TO DO IT, which I obviously don't.  And, uses it as a tell as to the strength of my hand, which he is already worried about.  So what does he do?  He passes.  What does this tell me?  He has Mana Drain.  If he didn't he would tap out because he would have no other plays.  And, if he had Force of Will he could easily Tap out and get Gifts with the DT.  Since he would be able to pitch the Gifts to FOW if I did indeed have a bomb when I untapped.

I draw the perfect card Volcanic Island.  I play it and think for a moment.  My hand is Gorilla Shaman, Mana Drain and Sundering Titan.  There is only one play.  Shaman go.  But I think for a moment and slyly say as though I had just thought of the possibility "Ah, you have a Drain!" and play my Shaman and pass.  Here is why I said that.  The goal here is for him to put me on a particular hand, and I 100% believe he put me on it.  In fact, he told me so after the tournament when we were talking.  Tinker and Force of Will.  Or, at least that is the hand that he should be the most afraid of me having by that play.

I know that my turns are limited here.  As soon as he gets enough Mana he has to go for it.  But, it is likely that he will not until he 1.  Draws a Force of Will to pair his Drain.  2.  Draws up to 7 land.  Having Shaman is huge here because I can keep him off Artifact mana while he sets up.  I need to draw well for the next two turns and have him draw not so well.  He plays a land and passes the turn.

I draw a Echoing Truth, probably the worst possible card.

My hand is now, Pearl, Sundering Titan, Mana Drain, Chain of Vapor.

I blow up his Mox and hit him for one.  I am now able to be agressive.  (not threatening in the scheme of things) But I can have a presence.  Every turn I have something to do.  I can attack him.  I can interact.  The fact that I have a 16 turn clock really means nothing, but in that game I believe it meant everthing, because I had things to do.  It put on pressure and it caused interaction.

Every turn I could fling my monkey into the red zone and say "Get you!" in a very intimidating fashion.  I could make my presence known.  Perhaps over emphasize the threat of the monkey, maybe make him a bit nervous because he had nothing to do but try to draw something good.  While I try to draw something good as well.

He draws and plays a land, and thinks.  I ask if he'd like to cast his Merchant Scroll.  A shot in the dark, but the only reasonable card I think he would be considering casting.  He asks if I am looking at his hand, and I explain that I am not but I know he has it anyways.  I can only assume this freaked him out a little bit.  He passes the turn a bit frazzled.

I untap and draw... of all cards... the best possible one.... the one that I need to draw to win this game..... The one that every one of you reading this story should be saying to yourselves the whole time.... "He needs to draw card X to actually win this game."

I drew it.

Force of Will off the top.

I got there.  I did it.  All of my hard work is about to pay off when he realizes he should have cast the merchant scroll last turn and casts it next turn.

I SMASH him for a stunning one with my Mox Monkey and Pass.

He untaps plays a land, and a Mox and a Black Lotus and Recoups his Yawgmoth's Will.  Christmas came twice this year.  The only dangerous card left in his deck, Black Lotus is going to get knocked out with my counter magic all at once.  I Mana Drain the Will.  He Mana Drains my Drain I force of Will his Drain.  He frowns.  and passes.

I untap draw a Thirst for Knowledge.  Slam a Titan into play, blow up his lands, and pound him with the Shaman.  Its all over now.

The morale of the story is... Don't give up, keep playing the game, find a way to win!  If you don't have the cards... Heck, your opponent doesn't need to know that.  Don't look dejected (unless you actually have the nuts...).

The key point is at one point in the game this happened:

I am in big trouble.  He has just resolved Recall.  I am tapped out and completely unable to defend myself.  And, he has five colorless mana floating.  Uh-oh.

He untaps.  Plays a land and uses four of the floating Mana to cast Gifts Ungiven. 

I was tapped out, with a board of Volcanic Island, Underground Sea, Mana Vault.  And a hand of Mana Drain, Sundering Titan, Pearl.  Against a board of Five lands four cards and a Gifts and won.

Anyways, I just wanted to share this story.  Hopefully, some of you will enjoy some of my insights and advice and use them to win some games.  In my opinion, blowing an opponent out with good cards is great fun and everything, but it is the games where your opponent has all the good cards and you don't and yet you can still find a way to win... That makes playing Magic, and Vintage Magic the Gathering in particular, such a gratifying experience.

Good luck, and good bluffing!

Cheers,
ffy

[Smmenen]

This was a really amazing game, and Paul Mastriano and I spent a good half an hour talking about it last night.

The GIfts player's hand: 2 Drains, 1 Recoup, 1 Tendrils, 1 Mox Emerald

Gifts board: 6 land

Demars hand: 1 Titan, 1 Drain

Brians board: Mana Vault, Mox, three lands

The gifst player had resolve Gifts the turn before for Will, REcoup, DT, and something else.   DT and Will went to graveyard.

What happened was pretty amazing.   The Gifts player  had two options:

1) Win immediately next turn (risking everything if Brian had two Drains in his hand) by playing Recoup on Will and having one Drain to protect it.   

2) Wait until he established abosolute control - that is, wait until he was absolutely sure that he could resolve his Recoup and Will and fight through as many counterspells as Brian could possibly play.    Since he was ahead in cards, all this meant was just drawing one FoW or one Misdirection.   

I think either decision is fine.   The chances that Brian has two drains is very low.  Especially since Brian had already played one (which got countered).   The Gifts player, however, felt that Brian could have had three drains because the Gifts player did have three Drains.   

The only trick is that if you choose option two, you have to stick with it all the way.

Brian managed to subtley convince the player that he had screwed up majorly and did this most forcefully after he had drawn the FoW.    At that point, the player was convinced that he should go for it and walked right into Brian's trap.   If he had stuck with his original plan and stuck in the control role, Brian probably would have lost. 

I've watched Brian lay trap after trap in magic games and half the time they walk into it and half the time they don't.  In every instance, it's fascinating to watch a great player making something out of nothing. 

[JR]

I was very glad to have watched this game. Doug Linn and I spent a good deal of time discussing it on the car ride home. our major point of interest is why you did not drain the second merchant scroll? This seemed like a better play at the time. If you had done so, wouldn't he not have resolved ancestral and you would have been in a much better position? the playing of a his second scroll (to me at least) signifies that he wants double backup, and thus I would put him on not being able to resolve ancestral right there. You also correctly put him on holding the drain, so he probably wouldn't have shot AR in your face anyway. If he did, you would have forced, and he would have lost.

Enlighten me, Brian. Also, congrats on the split. It was a fun day, and I will gladly serve as witness for your law suit.

JR.

[hulk3rules]

So you are saying if you play well and draw well then you will beat your opponent that misplays and draws poorly?

[wethepeople]

You should change the headline of this story to: "FFY's mind tricks FTW!"  

Outstanding plays, Brian, and congradulations on your finish.

I use similar tricks in games, just not nearly to the same degree. If I am to draw shit, I fake something good, if I am to actually draw something significant, I sigh and pretend that I am dissapointed. Although, I make sure to make such things obvious. Bluffing, when timed properly, wins games.

[ELD]

*NOT EVERYONE WILL AGREE WITH MY OPINION*

If my opponent goes so far as to try and distract me into making mistakes I tell them point blank to keep it to themselves.  If they so much as make a single comment after that, I call the judge.  For the record, I have rarely had to actually call the judge, as it is crystal clear after my warning that the banter is not welcome.  IMO talking to your opponent trying to distract them, aggravate them, confuse them, or interfere in their decision making process is unsportsman-like.  When I cast mystical, and someone says "for ancestral" I tell them to "let me play my deck and they can play theirs."  They have no reason to be making that comment.  It does not reflect their play options, it is not their choice.

Magic is also a timed game, and the rounds do not allow for conversations.  If I went to time and had allowed my opponent to talk about unnecessary things for a couple minutes during the round, that would be very frustrating.

For anyone who disagrees, ask yourself how such tactics would look if applied to a 12 year old.  Some kid has you dead to rights.  He's played the best game of his life when it matters most.  You manage to mess with his head and he forgets that he can win the game right now.  He misplays and you go on to be the winnar.  Gotta feel good about that one. 

That kind of tactic serves only to decrease the level of play.  I can see nothing rewarding about applying those kinds of tactics to win.  I'd just as soon hire someone to spill coffee on the table in hopes that my opponent panics and forgets about their mana drain mana.  Or bring up a topic that I know will get under my opponent's skin.  That'd could get a misplay or two.  This is similar to poker players who attempt to put people on tilt with abusive talk.  It is ungentlemanly IMO.  Ultimately it brings down the level of tournament play, can alienate players, and take a great deal of fun out of the game. 

But that is just one person's opinion. 

[SonataOfTheCathedral]

But if your opponent didn't play like a Donkey you would have lost?

Moral of story, don't play like a donkey.

[Pave]

IMO talking to your opponent trying to distract them, aggravate them, confuse them, or interfere in their decision making process is unsportsman-like...It is ungentlemanly IMO

This is also my feeling.  If FFY's actions were within the rules of the game, were they in the spirit of it?  FFY's grim determination to stay in the game is commendable, but actively, vocally pricking the psyche of his opponent is dubious, if not downright unattractive.  His opponent might have ignored or silenced a less prominent opponent, and so he let himself be bullied.  Bullying, however subtle, isn't ideal.

[Hi-Val]

But if your opponent didn't play like a Donkey you would have lost?

Moral of story, don't play like a donkey.

His opponent didn't play badly, Brian bluffed that he had counters at a critical time and won the game because of it. The whole setup of the early game was him constructing an elaborate bluff of a good hand; you can trust me on this, I sat directly to his left and watched the whole thing unfold.

[Methuselahn]

There is an obvious relationship between all of your tournament successes and your gameplay.  This cannot be denied.

So, you created a bluff with your mouth and not the board position, good job.  Whatever it takes. 

After reading this story, I can't help but assume you're one of the best rules lawyers out there.  Truly inspiriing.  I hope that when you die and meet Saint Peter before the gates of your maker, your skills will be just as good.

That kind of tactic serves only to decrease the level of play.

This post is inappropriate, especially with the unnecessary religious reference.
-Jacob

[hulk3rules]

But if your opponent didn't play like a Donkey you would have lost?

Moral of story, don't play like a donkey.

His opponent didn't play badly, Brian bluffed that he had counters at a critical time and won the game because of it. The whole setup of the early game was him constructing an elaborate bluff of a good hand; you can trust me on this, I sat directly to his left and watched the whole thing unfold.

First of all, he used a dual land to cast gifts instead of his basic island.  Next- he let his opponent talk him out of making correct plays.  Sounds like he played poorly to me

[Klep]

This story is a masterful example of the effect a strong mental game can have.  Whether you like it or not, bluffing is an integral and important part of playing Magic, and if you are good at it your game will improve. The only statement I take issue with (and I suspect it was an unintentional slip) is the idea that you should never look defeated.  In this situation and situations like it, feigning strength is perfectly appropriate, but there are times when it is advantageous to instead feign weakness in order to induce your opponent to overextend.  Players should keep that in mind as well.

[seer]

As someone who has been on the other side of the table from Brian in this kind of situation I believe nothing is wrong with a little table talk unless it turns abusive. I think I learned a lot from reading this post about how to approach the mental side of the game. A very well written post and great topic!

[The Atog Lord]

I agree with ELD entirely.

I wrote something along these lines in November of 2000. The quote below is from an article I wrote on how to play Trix, which was published on The Dojo.

When you are playing a game, don’t think about how good it would be to win or how bad it would be to lose. Don’t think about how likely you are to make top 8. Clear you mind of all thoughts except for the game at hand, because that game requires every ounce of your mind.

An opponent may try to dictate the flow of the match. He may try to hurry you. Play slowly, because playing quickly can lead to mistakes. He may look impatient. Don’t care. Shuffle for a long time between each game and after each Mulligan. He may put down his deck, signifying that he is ready to play. Don’t care. Shuffle until you think that your deck is sufficiently randomized. Then shuffle his deck. Think before you act, and do nothing that you are not certain you want to do. The more your opponent tries to hurry the game along, the more it is important to make certain that you think before doing anything. Whatever you do, don’t allow yourself to get swept up by the quick tempo of an opponent. Trix requires too much thought to be rushed.

It was true seven years ago and remains true to this day.

[Hi-Val]

This story is a masterful example of the effect a strong mental game can have.  Whether you like it or not, bluffing is an integral and important part of playing Magic, and if you are good at it your game will improve. The only statement I take issue with (and I suspect it was an unintentional slip) is the idea that you should never look defeated.  In this situation and situations like it, feigning strength is perfectly appropriate, but there are times when it is advantageous to instead feign weakness in order to induce your opponent to overextend.  Players should keep that in mind as well.

Excellent point, Klep.

Marc Perez (PTW) comes to mind here-- he was the hands-down master of the bluff.

I'm wondering whether talking to another poker player to put them ill at ease is unsportsmanlike, because many of the very successful pros do it and I haven't heard it regarded that way.

hulk3rules, would you say that if Brian had remained completely silent, that the opponent would have made the same mistakes? If Brian had, in addition, not altered his posture or anything of the like, would he have still won the game? Or am I reading you incorrectly here?

[dicemanx]

Hmm, very interesting. In a different thread, I asked the question if we are doing enough to play the game beyond the game itself, if we should be more active in seeking to extract info to make correct in-game decisions, or create misinformation, or even create disruption to steer our opponent down an incorrect path by causing them to lose focus.

FFY did engage in such a game beyond the game, and he's being criticized. I find nothing objectionable in what he did. He wasn't being obnoxious, or irritating, or doing anything outside of the rules; he was trying to sell a hand to the opponent via verbal communication, and also disrupt his opponent's thought processes when it came to making a critical play. This is well within the rules, and qualifies as a skillful play in my opinion. The psychological component to this game is taking on a significantly bigger role it seems as technical playskill gaps are diminishing.

Note that ELD has devised an effective parry to such tactics; that too is a sign of masterful play. His motivations might be out of disgust by what his opponent is attempting to do, but unfortunately his moral projection will have little impact on how people will choose to play and enjoy this game. While it's a nice attempt to create some pathos for the victim by giving an example of a 12 year old that is so tragically swindled out of his hard earned victory, the bottom line is that if your opponent can be so easily distracted or open to the power of sugestion or persuasion, why not take advantage of such a weakness. This is part of the game, and those that take full advantage deserve to be rewarded for it.

[JR]

While it is not mentioned previously, and some might find this information irrelevant, I feel that I should bring up that Brian's opponent was, in my opinion, engaging in similar tactics throughout the course of the day. In the two matches that I watched him play in, I felt that while he played well, he played excessively slowly, and made constant remarks to his friends and girlfriend that, like Brian's, were made only in an effort to psyche his opponents out. In his top 8 match vs. Nam Tran, the gifts player made several comments that would have gotten raised eyebrows or words from myself if I were in Nam's position.

I know, I know, two wrongs and all that. But it seems to me that however wrong these tactics are, if both players are attempting to use them, why should we tsk at one for doing it better? Brian said nothing that I construed as antagonistic; in fact, most of the derogatory remarks were said by the gifts player himself once Brian had informed him of his error. Whether we like it or not, this table talk is part of the game, and some people will attempt to use it to gain what can become a substantial advantage. Those of us that choose to not partake in these tactics have to prepare for them nontheless. I think that Brian's post shows us that we can learn alot by looking at this play scenario from both sides.

JR.

[UR]

In the two matches that I watched him play in, I felt that while he played well, he played excessively slowly,

So, what do you do as an opponent (or as a spectator for that matter)? Call over a Judge... if he agrees there is an instant DQ waiting for him. Simply because slow-playing is cheating.

Tabletalk is fine though. Nothing illegal about it ruleswise either. You can call over a judge because your opponent asks if your scroll will be for Ancestral, but there isn't anything he can do. Nothing whatsoever... because talking to your opponent isn't unsportsmanlike conduct... even if you asked him to shut up. I should know because I talk to my opponents all the time.

Why? Because it gives you a ton of information and allows you to win more.

For anyone who disagrees, ask yourself how such tactics would look if applied to a 12 year old.  Some kid has you dead to rights.  He's played the best game of his life when it matters most.  You manage to mess with his head and he forgets that he can win the game right now.  He misplays and you go on to be the winnar.  Gotta feel good about that one.

You won. That is the whole point of the game. Competative play means winning by any (legal) means necessary. If you don't want to do that, you are putting yourself at a disadvantage and maybe you shouldn't play tournaments then or accept that you will lose because of it sometimes (I for one couldn't care less about winning in T1... just as long as I have good time playing the deck I like).

[andrewpate]

I faced a player at a PTQ last year who went on for the whole match.  He kept talking to his friends at adjacent tables, making lots of nonchalant comments about, "Oh, are you going to that Grand Prix?  Yeah, I've got a couple of byes just on rating, but not sure if I'll go."  Stuff like that.  And he kept on leaning way over toward my board, trying to get me not to look at his, making lots of comments like, "Oh, man, you got me, just sack out," when he has this big Goblin Legionnaire sitting there.  In between games, after lucksacking me out with Char off the top after drawing 2 of his maindeck copies of  Kataki, War's Wage (against my Affinity), he flagged down a buddy, "Yeah, I won, but he kind of handed it to me," and then gave me a "Well, you did" face and shrugged, like of course I know about the big misplays that cost me the game.

I wanted to punch him in the mouth the entire match, but it's not really against the rules.  It just depends on whether you want to make friends or not.

[Anusien]

This story is a masterful example of the effect a strong mental game can have.  Whether you like it or not, bluffing is an integral and important part of playing Magic, and if you are good at it your game will improve. The only statement I take issue with (and I suspect it was an unintentional slip) is the idea that you should never look defeated.  In this situation and situations like it, feigning strength is perfectly appropriate, but there are times when it is advantageous to instead feign weakness in order to induce your opponent to overextend.  Players should keep that in mind as well.

Pretty good.

Hey Rich, go link to that article.  It was a really good read.

[orgcandman]

...but it's not really against the rules.

Actually, it can be. If your intent is to banter your opponent until they are playing on tilt, you're most certainly being unsporting. Remember that there actually ARE rules about how you can and cannot talk to your opponent. A good example of this are the rules around asking for concessions.

Also, your opponent doing things like obscuring his board position can be construed as attempts at cheating. Call a judge over immediately.

I've seen players getting bantered so much that they were almost in tears. I saw one player who had been bantered like this, run out of the store crying, get their cards, come back to the tournament and sell out of magic completely. It's totally 100% unacceptable for this sort of thing to happen. If you feel your opponent getting under your skin after constant banter and remarks which serve no purpose other than to put you on tilt, call over a judge.

[The Atog Lord]

Sadly, Kevin, the Dojo is no longer with us. The site, with all its classic Magic glory, is no more.

But on the matter of this "clever" table talk. I've seen many opponents become so distracted by their very clever mindgames that they fail to make the correct plays on the table. This sort of thing can easily backfire.

[Demonic Attorney]

What interests me most is how FFY presents this situation as evidence for the utility of psychological tactics despite the fact that they're clearly a double-edged sword.  In this very scenario, FFY was only able to capitalize on his psychological game because his opponent made the mistake of overinvesting in the same game plan as FFY.  Specifically, they thought they could get helpful information from FFY's behavior and table talk.  Had FFY's opponent not based their play decisions on this presumption, they arguably would have won.

This is not to say that FFY was wrong or unsportsmanlike in doing what he did.  When you're behind in board position with nothing relevant in your hand, you have to rely on what scant resources you have to stay in the game.  And while I've always been among the more vocal critics of FFY's "behave antagonistically and hope it affects my opponent's play decisions" strategy, I see nothing inappropriate in what FFY did here.  There's a world of difference between intentionally upsetting someone through insulting them, versus making innocuous remarks that someone might draw unhelpful information from.

That having been said, I still don't suggest relying on mind games as anything other than an absolute last resort, for three reasons: 

First, cognitive psychology confirms what most of us already accept as intuitive; people only have a limited capacity to store and apply mental information.  If you devote some of those finite cognitive resources to playing "mind games" with your opponent, you create the risk of misplaying by losing track of game state information. 

Second and as this scenario powerfully illustrates, whenever you engage someone in "mind games," you run the risk of being burned if they happen to be better than you in using psychological tactics.  FFY's opponent thought he could rely on FFY to glean information to use in his play decisions.  Unofrtunately for him, FFY was a step ahead of him and led him into a misplay.  There will always be someone out there who is better at mind games than you and the better they are, the harder it will be to spot them in advance.  By habitually relying on "mind games," you create the risk of running into someone who will beat you at your own game.   

Third and most importantly, the game state is always going to be a more reliable source of information because it can't mislead you.  In the facts of this example, if FFY's opponent had limited the basis of his decisions to the game state, he probably would have made better plays and won the game.  Instead, he assumed he could rely on FFY for useful information and lost.  It's always safer to draw inferences from objective information and avoid the risk of being misled.

Of course as I had said originally, when you're in a position like FFY was in, you have to use what little you can to stay alive.  The flip side to this, and my point in this point is, when you have better information to rely on, use that first.  It's less of a gamble and will pay off in the long run.

[Parcher]

Sadly, Kevin, the Dojo is no longer with us. The site, with all its classic Magic glory, is no more.

I'm not sure what article you are looking for, or when it was printed so I'm not going to look for it.

But The Dojo is still available. Go to archive.org. Then in "the wayback machine" box enter thedojo.com.

It has monthly lists of the majority of The Dojo content. A great deal of the tournament reports and such didn't get archived, but pretty much all of the articles did.

[forests failed you]

...but it's not really against the rules.

Actually, it can be. If your intent is to banter your opponent until they are playing on tilt, you're most certainly being unsporting. Remember that there actually ARE rules about how you can and cannot talk to your opponent. A good example of this are the rules around asking for concessions.

Also, your opponent doing things like obscuring his board position can be construed as attempts at cheating. Call a judge over immediately.

I've seen players getting bantered so much that they were almost in tears. I saw one player who had been bantered like this, run out of the store crying, get their cards, come back to the tournament and sell out of magic completely. It's totally 100% unacceptable for this sort of thing to happen. If you feel your opponent getting under your skin after constant banter and remarks which serve no purpose other than to put you on tilt, call over a judge.

Except that this has nothing to do with what is being discussed, or with anything relevent to the topic.  

This thread is discussing a specific match that occured and some of the plays that made it winnable; even though it looked really, really, grim.


This thread is NOT:
1. About cheating or breaking the floor rules as proposed by the DCI.
2. This thread is not about harassing one's opponent or hurting their feelings.
3. This thread is not about conducting oneself in an unsportsmanlike manner as proposed by the DCI floor rules.
4. This thread is not about obscuring your board position for cheating advantage.
5.  Asking my opponent for a concession to gain tactical advantage.

This is a thread about:

1. Not giving up even when you are losing.
2. Playing a game all the way through on many different levels.
3. How to bluff well.
4. How to represent a specific hand, and why you might want to do it.
5. Regulating the 'momentum' of a match.

Moreover, this is not a thread designed to enlighten Vintage Adepts or Moderators, (as they likely already know these tricks of the trade) or even to created an in depth conversation about the ethics of in game psychological tactic among the elite of the community.  I posted this mini-article to help newer users, and players who are new to Vintage to understand some of the dynamics within Vintage that are unspoken or less tangible and abstract.  Or, to propose a common question among newer players to the format:  "How do I beat the nutz, if I don't untap with the nutz too?"  This is how you do it, like it or hate it.  

This thread is not designed to instigate a debate about, 'what is too much,' or 'is table talk for mental advantage gentlemanly.'  I don't care about that, I care about the rules, playing, and winning; and if you guys want to discuss it feel free to create a thread devoted to it.  At the end of a match I extend the hand to my opponent win or lose on a game well played.

Secondly, my opponent was not a 12 year old kid;  However, if he were I would still have played MY game and tried to win.  I watched an 11 year old kid beat Brian Bobek and Kyle Boggemes at PTQ Detroit largely because they underestimated the fact that he could play competently.  An opponent is an opponent, no matter who they are, how old they are, what gender, race, ethnicity, planet of origen, height, weight, hair color, speaking accent, or style of dress they have.  I will play just as hard to win the match no matter who, or what, I am paired up against.  I would play just as hard if I were paired up against Pat Chapin, a random newb playing Tarpan, or if my opponent were C3-P0.

I took the time to lay out this thread for two reasons:

1. Table talk, psychological advantages, and bluffing are an important part of the game, within the parameters of the rules.  If you object to the use of tactics other than silently playing your cards; I have no problem with that, you are more than welcome to your own opinion and style of play.  However, you would be wrong to assume that everybody agrees with this line of thinking, especially the DCI floor rules.

2.  Actually playing well is something that is very difficult to learn.  I was lucky enough to have been surrounded with extremely strong players throughout my entire time as a tournament Magic player.  I learned how to make strong plays, bluffs, and set traps from watching players like Mark Herberholtz and Michael Jacobs do it game in and game out.  However, the only way to level up and gain said skills is to actually learn about it, and embrace that part of one's game.  The hope here is that newer players, who do not necessarily have access to this kind of information will improve their overall game by having an article like this to reference.  

Magic, like any other game of skill... Poker, Golf, Chess, Billiards, Dance-Dance-Revolution, or, whatever game you fancy;  is about learning and improving one's own game.  You do that by playing, making mistakes, encountering new situations, and learning.  The point of the thread was to expose newer players to some in game situations and lines of play that they might not have otherwise considered.  And judging by the number of PMs I recieved as a result of this article I think that I succeeded.

[Mr. Type 4]

I saw this game, and it was awesome.  Being able to bluff a strong hand is one of the primary reasons to play a control archtype. 

Don't let them get to you, Brian.  As long as you're good, there will always be haters.

[ELD]

Magic, like any other game of skill... Poker, Golf, Chess, Billiards, Dance-Dance-Revolution, or, whatever game you fancy;  is about learning and improving one's own game. 

Couldn't be more true. 

The point being missed here is "trying to make your opponent play badly" is not "improving your own game."  It is trying to lessen your opponent's game.  The games in the above example can be used to demonstrate the lack of this in other tournament play.  Poker is the least applicable to my point.  These tactics do exist there.  If you take a look at many of the "pros" who attempt to put opponents on tilt, they do not have long term success.  Matasou's personal life is a good example of this.  It is a miserable way to play the game, and the true gentlemen of the game have been successful without it.  Maybe it has something to do with the fact that being a donkey would have literally got you killed back in the day.  Perhaps they can see that in life, even in games, who you are is made up of what you do. 

If you watch a chess match, there is no banter to create distractions.  In tournament billiards they do not engage in verbal tactics either.  In golf, you certainly don't talk when your opponent is over the ball.  The etiquette in golf would be a good thing for people who engage in verbal tactics to consider.  It is not against the rules to talk, but they still don't as they want to preserve the integrity of the game.  That is something to think about. 

As someone who had to move to Magic after the arcades died, I can tell you that at the highest level of fighting games, verbal tactics do not exist frequently.  It is definitely out there with the weaker players looking for an edge.  Once you're dealing the the best players out there, they're attempting to out play you in the game.  There is definitely a feeling of "you bring your best, I'll bring mine and may the better man win."

I find it interesting that no one has addressed the point that banter is IMO stalling.  It clearly wastes time, and can easily be used to use the clock to one's advantage.  I also wonder if asking someone about newly ex-girlfriend during a match would be acceptable to those who favor verbal tactics.  "So how's Kelly?" "We just broke up." "Oh, I'm so sorry to hear that."  GG 

I think the bottom line with these tactics is this:  If it is within the rules to try and distract your opponent, then it is within the rules for them to tell you to harshly say "shut up."  I for one, would not like to spend my scarce free time surrounded by aggravated people telling each other to "shut up."  I think it creates a miserable atmosphere, which I would not want to be a part of. 

[Smmenen]

I see nothing inappropriate in what FFY did here.

Thank you. 

IMO, the psychology of magic is part of what makes it so fun.

What I enjoy about magic is that it is social.  This is why I will never partake in Magic Online.   The idea of sitting in front of a computer to play games is not appealing.   We are social animals with a particular psychology.   

I disagree with the idea that such banter is unsportsmanlike or brings down the level of the game.   It is part of the game.   Magic is more than the cards we play - it is the result of complex mental processes that determine in-game decision making.   The stress of the match is one form of stressor.  Perhaps other factors are important such as the players mood or outside life events.   Rich Shay complained that his moving affected his game at Gencon.   People get nervous and it can cause a player to crack and make a mistake.  I see no reason why an opponent can't add other psychological pressures to the flow of the game to add to what is already and naturally present. 

But on the matter of this "clever" table talk. I've seen many opponents become so distracted by their very clever mindgames that they fail to make the correct plays on the table. This sort of thing can easily backfire.

Ahh true.  But I definitely got to you in our matches.  True, the sheer impact of winning three of our five tournament games last year on turn one may have contributed, but by taking control of the match psychologically I felt that I was able to control the rhythm of the match.   

[forests failed you]

Magic, like any other game of skill... Poker, Golf, Chess, Billiards, Dance-Dance-Revolution, or, whatever game you fancy;  is about learning and improving one's own game. 

Couldn't be more true. 

The point being missed here is "trying to make your opponent play badly" is not "improving your own game."  It is trying to lessen your opponent's game.  The games in the above example can be used to demonstrate the lack of this in other tournament play.  Poker is the least applicable to my point.  These tactics do exist there.  If you take a look at many of the "pros" who attempt to put opponents on tilt, they do not have long term success.  Matasou's personal life is a good example of this.  It is a miserable way to play the game, and the true gentlemen of the game have been successful without it.  Maybe it has something to do with the fact that being a donkey would have literally got you killed back in the day.  Perhaps they can see that in life, even in games, who you are is made up of what you do. 

If you watch a chess match, there is no banter to create distractions.  In tournament billiards they do not engage in verbal tactics either.  In golf, you certainly don't talk when your opponent is over the ball.  The etiquette in golf would be a good thing for people who engage in verbal tactics to consider.  It is not against the rules to talk, but they still don't as they want to preserve the integrity of the game.  That is something to think about. 

As someone who had to move to Magic after the arcades died, I can tell you that at the highest level of fighting games, verbal tactics do not exist frequently.  It is definitely out there with the weaker players looking for an edge.  Once you're dealing the the best players out there, they're attempting to out play you in the game.  There is definitely a feeling of "you bring your best, I'll bring mine and may the better man win."

I find it interesting that no one has addressed the point that banter is IMO stalling.  It clearly wastes time, and can easily be used to use the clock to one's advantage.  I also wonder if asking someone about newly ex-girlfriend during a match would be acceptable to those who favor verbal tactics.  "So how's Kelly?" "We just broke up." "Oh, I'm so sorry to hear that."  GG 

I think the bottom line with these tactics is this:  If it is within the rules to try and distract your opponent, then it is within the rules for them to tell you to harshly say "shut up."  I for one, would not like to spend my scarce free time surrounded by aggravated people telling each other to "shut up."  I think it creates a miserable atmosphere, which I would not want to be a part of. 

I think you are missing the point here:

True.  Talking is not a part of those games.  However, I never said that they were.  I said that making mistakes, learning from them, and improving one's game are parts of those games, as they are in Magic.  Never did I say that table talk was part of those games.

Table talk IS a part of Magic the Gathering. The way you interact with an opponent in a game is one of the ways that you cause interaction, gather information, represent information, among other things.  Bluffing, reading and evaluating tells is a HUGE part of playing a control mirror in Magic, and a huge part of playing the game in general.  Therefore, since talking, bluffing et cetera is a part of Magic, in order to play at your highest level, you have to perfect those skills along with your technical game.

It is against the floor rules to tell your opponent to 'shut up.'  Your entire earlier arguement was that it was 'ungentlemanly' to engage is practices you felt were manipulative or unsavory.  How is telling someone to 'shut up' any more mature?  Its practically the same thing as calling them an 'idiot-face' or a 'butt-head.'  The reason you can't tell your opponent to 'shut up' or have a judge tell them they can't talk, is that talking and interaction of that sort is fundimentally 'a part of the game.'  

I've seen players more famous than I do things way sneakier than anything I did in this article, and be commended for their masterful mental skill.

Dual Land Extended.  Old Old Extended.  Kai Budde has two lands in play in a UR v UR mirror.  His opponent has two lands in play and casts Impulse.  Kai tapps both of his lands in response, and then untaps them allowing for the Impulse to resolve.  Kai didn't have a counterspell in hand, but was clearly representing one.  As a result, his opponent doesn't untap and drop the Ophidian in his hand that turn, because he wants to protect it with Red Blast.  In turn Kai Draws the Volcanic Island he needs to put his Red Blast and Blue Blast online to stop the Phid.  True, Kai would have been able to Reb it that turn anyway.  However, the difference is that he soaked up a whole turn, 3 mana, by bluffing the Counterspell.  Briliant and masterful.  And at a PT too.

Like it or not, talking is a part of the game.  Just like it is a part of Poker.  Matasau is a bad example because he is an piece of garbage.  Goading your opponent and being obnoxious is one thing and against Magic floor rules.  However, good players will interact with their opponents.  They might ask them a question in response to a raise to try and get some information, they might make a comment while their opponent is considering a call.  I see players like Layne Flack or David Nygraneau (spelling) use table talk as a tactical advantage all the time.

Being able to talk encourages interaction.  Telling people to shut up does not.  Magic games should be interactive, I like a game where my opponent and I talk during the match, much more than the games where my opponent shows up with headphones, sunglasses and doesn't speak.  However, I respect his decision to be that way.  And regardless of how non responsive he is... I will continue to talk to him throughout the match.  It is part of my game.  If my opponent is allowed to go to lengths to create a non interactive atmosphere, I am allowed to go to lengths to make sure he does interact to the absolute minimum that the rules allow.  I will ask him questions, and whether or not he likes it, he will give me answers to my questions.

I hope that people who are reading this thread are starting to realize that mastery of the psychological aspects of the game, talking, bluffing, representing, posture, et cetera IS important.  Being good at these aspects of the game cannot do anything but help make you a stronger player and lead to more wins.  Especially for newer players; being able to recognize when your opponent is using tactics such as these to dictate the game, or even being able to bluff your opponent off making a play that would otherwise cripple you, is a great boon to one's chances of making a top eight.

[ELD]

How is telling someone to 'shut up' any more mature?

Is this a concession that there is an inherent lack of maturity with those who use verbal tactics to distract their opponent? 

Dual Land Extended.  Old Old Extended.  Kai Budde has two lands in play in a UR v UR mirror.  His opponent has two lands in play and casts Impulse.  Kai tapps both of his lands in response, and then untaps them allowing for the Impulse to resolve.  Kai didn't have a counterspell in hand, but was clearly representing one.  As a result, his opponent doesn't untap and drop the Ophidian in his hand that turn, because he wants to protect it with Red Blast.  In turn Kai Draws the Volcanic Island he needs to put his Red Blast and Blue Blast online to stop the Phid.  True, Kai would have been able to Reb it that turn anyway.  However, the difference is that he soaked up a whole turn, 3 mana, by bluffing the Counterspell.  Briliant and masterful.  And at a PT too.

Notice that Kai did not do anything to affect the decision-making ability of his opponent.  He made a play that gave his opponent "information."  His opponent then took all the information infront of him, and tried to make the best play possible.  This is entirely different than trying to get your opponent to make a bad play that they would have never made if they were on top of their game.  Also note, Kai did not make any verbal remarks to put his opponent on tilt.  I think it would be difficult to find an example that is extolled involving one player getting another player off his game.  Even in poker, it is only celebrated when it is done in retaliation. 

I am entirely aware of the psychology of Magic.  I use it to the extent that I feel is good for my own attitude, and the game itself.  At TempleCon Brassman reminded me of a bluff I made from over 5 years ago.  I was playing a very weak deck with the anvil/chains lock.  I switched it up, as the owner of the shop had actually asked me to stop playing decks that would definitely win every week.   My opponent was playing Tog, the deck that I normally ran back then.  On my turn I cast Ancestral.  I drew into Duress, Will, Land.  I played the land and duressed.  Seeing two counters and a duress.  I take a counter and ask, with just Will in my hand, have I played a land yet?  My opponent informs me that I have.  I pass the turn.  He passes back, choosing not to duress my "land" and sitting on his counter.  On my turn I rip duress.  I duress his only counter, and resolve Will FTW. 

The point of my words here is to try and illustrate that there is a line.  That line is often crossed.  I have seen "big names" in Magic act in a way that I perceive as very unsportsmanlike.  Going on about the strength of their hand, exclaiming how good each card they draw is, it is just not a gentlemanly way to conduct oneself.  I'm not saying it's necessarily against the rules, but from my own experience, it is not needed to win in Vintage, that much is for certain. 

All that said, table talk is not the same as trying to put an opponent on tilt.  It would be very difficult to explain that to someone who doesn't understand that already.  Specifically saying something like "That may have just cost you the game" would be beyond table talk.  Table talk should be pleasant for both players.