The most luck intensive format?

[Eandori]

Got a question for you all.

My friend and I are butting heads on this subject.  Both of us actively play all the formats out there and of course each of us has our favorites.  I prefer Vintage/Legacy/Pauper and he prefers Extended/Sealed Deck/Draft/MTGO.  After seeing our last 4 sealed deck format games be 100% determined by who either got mana screwed or flooded (which seems to happen a lot in those formats...) I tried to make the case that's why I prefer the constructed formats.  He of course disagreed and said they all have equal amounts of luck factor.

I've played Magic since 1997, and it's been very apparent to me (or at least I believe so...) that the limited formats rely much heavier on a luck factor.  More specifically Sealed deck really.  I prefer to play constructed formats because I can minimize the luck factor through better card draw, mana curve, efficientcy, etc.

Has there ever been any data driven studies that show which formats have the most games determined mainly by the mana source pulls?  Are there any official articles discussing any agreed upon beliefs for the most "lucky" versus "skill intensive" formats?

I would prefer to avoid replies of just speculation if possible.  I'm looking for any actual data that has been collected or well estabilished articles on the subject.

Thanks.

[coyoteuglly]

Got a question for you all.

My friend and I are butting heads on this subject.  Both of us actively play all the formats out there and of course each of us has our favorites.  I prefer Vintage/Legacy/Pauper and he prefers Extended/Sealed Deck/Draft/MTGO. 

I apprently missed the memo on when the made MTGO a format.

[Eandori]

Really not the response I was looking for...

[Roxas]

I consider Sealed to be incredibly luck-based, just because of the number of things you have no control over. I generally consider draft the least luck-based, because you have a large level of control over everything: card pool, deck construction, and in-game play. While constructed formats do generally give you a greater level of deck consistency, especially in respect to mana bases, constructed tournaments have an additional luck-based element through pairings. You could be playing the best deck with a perfect mana base, but if you get paired with too many bad matchups (which is not improbable even if not too many players are playing such decks), you're still probably not going to do very well in that particular tournament. This generally doesn't happen in booster drafts, provided that there isn't a card in the draft on the level of Umezawa's Jitte or something else hideously broken.

So, as far as the level of control a player has over his own winning and losing, I say draft > constructed > sealed.

[Eandori]

I completely agree with everything you said Roxas.

Are there any studies taken that show that with numbers?  Anyone ever taken the time to track how many games are won/lost based on mana pulls and shown the data?  Do you know of an official article somewhere discussing this subject?

Thanks,

[Eandori]

/Bump

Does nobody else really have input to this topic?  Is it that you all agree with what was written so there's no need to reply?  C'mon guys... Magic players are thinkers.  We have opinions about everything.  List'em!  Even if you agree, just reply that you agree.

I'm really tired of having this discussion with people who in my opinion just can't see what's going on.  I want to have some thread or some info I can refer them to... to end what I view as wasted-time discussions.

[rikimaru75]

In my opinion, the most luck intensive format seems to be Sealed Deck.  This is simply due to the fact that your sealed pool may not have the necessary 'bombs' or 'answers' to deal with other sealed pools.  For example, in the Shadowmoor sealed launch party, someone pulled double Oona, Queen of the Fey.  Meanwhile, my 'bombs' were Grim Poppet and Order of Whiteclay.  I easily went 0-2 drop that day.

Honestly, I think if one wants to test their limited skills, booster drafting is the method to do it.  You 'choose your destiny' with the cards you pull.

As for constructed, there are so many Netdecks nowadays that I find it more a matter of money than real play skill sometimes.

[Matt]

Roxas pretty much nailed it in one.

[Eandori]

Great replies guys, keep'em coming!  Let's put this stupid topic to bed.

[andrewpate]

Roxas pretty much nailed it in one.

Note also that Sealed is rarely if ever used on the PT level.  I'd imagine that pros really, really hate losing thousands of dollars in the top 8 due to one player's tournament deck having Meloku and Kumano in it.

[Tin_Mox5831]

As for constructed, there are so many Netdecks nowadays that I find it more a matter of money than real play skill sometimes.

I disagree completely. I think that with so much shared information and such connectivity, the cream will rise to the top in terms of playskill more often than not. I personally love playing against Baron Von Moneybags who doesn't know how to play his deck.

[zeus-online]

As for constructed, there are so many Netdecks nowadays that I find it more a matter of money than real play skill sometimes.

I think you've got it wrong! more netdecks means that people are deck-wise on fairer grounds compared to each other... Which means that selecting the right deck and playing it properly weighs in more then anything.

/Zeus

[Anusien]

Roxas pretty much nailed it in one.

Note also that Sealed is rarely if ever used on the PT level.  I'd imagine that pros really, really hate losing thousands of dollars in the top 8 due to one player's tournament deck having Meloku and Kumano in it.

Well, Sealed allows better pairings.  When you draft, you're only supposed to be paired against people in the same draft, so you have to redraft every 3-4 rounds.  Consequently, a Draft GP with 900+ players would take far far longer than a Sealed GP.