Vintage Adept Q&A #17: Dead Giveaways

[Demonic Attorney]

if you are sitting down accross from an unknown opponent, or for that matter any opponent against whom you have no prior knowldge of what theya re playing and no personal knowledge to determine their archetype, what are the signals that you look out for to determine what kind or deck/archetype they are playing? I'm not looking for obvois signals here (turn 1 Workshop, turn 1 necropotence, etc...), but say they take thier first turn and don;t give what we might call an obvious signal- what are some key early signs of Tezz/Drains vs TPS for example, or BobTezz vs BUG Fish?

[forests failed you]

There are a few tricks you can use to determine what your opponent is playing; they are true more than they are not true--but they are wrong enough that you don't want to base your mulliganing and turn one plays solely on them--but rather, they are only useful to justify why one of two good options might be better or worse than the other.

1.  Look at the quality of your opponent's sleeves and how he is shuffling.  Are they badly worn?  Are they grimy?  Does he or she shuffle skillfully or sloppily?  People who have been playing Magic for years tend to have mastered shuffling their decks quickly and efficiently.  It isn't to say that they are going to be playing a control deck or an aggro deck, but I am much less afraid of a newer less skilled player with a control deck that requires them to make a lot of decisions than with an aggro deck where they have more simple decisions.  If my opponent has dirty sleeves and shuffles poorly, it is very likely I will beat them handily if they are playing a control deck, since they are more apt to punt games away when they have lots of options and will inevitably make poor plays at some point.  So, in this instance it is useful to assume they are playing an aggro deck.  Since it is likely that they only way that they will win is to gain a swift tempo advantage they can ride to victory, I will usually look to keep a hand that can sustain early pressure. 

Good / Tournament players who have been around long enough know that you can get game loss penalties for badly worn sleeves because they are considered marked; thus, good players tend to have new/clean card protectors more often than not.  Bad players are much more dangerous with aggressive decks because these types of decks can punish slow starts.  With this in mind, it is USEFUL to assume that these types of players are playing a deck that will punish a slow hand, or a hand with risky mana.

2.  What types of Sleeves does your opponent have?  Do not base your decisions solely on this, because you will get burned over time; but, these trends are true more than they are untrue:  Pink protectors = blue deck, Red Mana Symbol protectors = Red deck, the MTG Sleeves with Black Lotus on the back or the MTG card back on the back = spike deck. 

Obviously, this isn't always true.  I have played against people who buy the Red Mana Symbol sleeves and are playing UW control.  However, the fact that somebody would play UW control in Red Mana Symbol sleeves (which is obvious misinformation) is based upon something.  It is based upon the preconception that an opponent would except you to be playing red if you have red sleeves.  It tends to be true, but isn't always true, and can sometimes be intentionally false.

3.  What is your opponent's disposition like?  When I sit down at the table I always say hello and introduce to my opponent and make small talk with them:  where are you from?  how's it going?  etc.  How does your opponent react to this?  Is he nice and talkative back to you or is he quiet and give you one word responses?

The quiet ones are the ones you should "tend" to be worried about.  They are usually spikes.  They came to game and they are not interested in chit chatting with you.  Expect them to be playing one of the two best decks.  These players are "trying" to act like professional card players.  They don't want to give you any information by talking to you, and they also are not at the event to hang out and have a good time--they came to game and came to win. 

My generalization here is that:  They are most likely to be playing whatever deck is most likely to make them "feel" like they are a master while they are playing it.  In Standard I would assume that they were playing UW control--because they get to play with cards that give them a lot of decisions, Jace & Jura.  Or, in Vintage they are probably playing with Mana Drains or Dark Rituals.  If Blue is the best deck (which is almost always the case in Vintage) I would assume they are likely to be playing blue.  Obviously, this also isn't ALWAYS right.  But it is a trend I've observed from playing for a long, long time.

Another useful thing to know about this guy is that he is always aggressive--but almost never all in.  It is a really useful tip for beating solid players that are not masters.
 
This one is Vintage specific.  Individuals who are older (+25yrs old) tend to have a higher probability of playing Mishra's Workshop decks;  Younger teenagers (-21) have a higher probability of playing fish/creature decks; people with scraggly beards and heavy metal T-shirts play graveyard decks.


Obviously, this isn't always true.  But it is an observable trend I've noticed over a long period of time.

a.  Stax requires patience, and $Workshop$.  People who play workshops don't like to play proxies which means they need to buy Workshops. Also, people who get shops tend to play them...for years and years.  Obviously, not always true--but true enough that I feel comfortable mentioning it.

b.  The youngsters tend to like the fish because for the past five years or so Magic is Standard has moved toward a world where creatures and attacking is where its at.  Thus, playing guys and attacking is familiar and an easy way to transition from other formats to Vintage.  Legacy Fish and Vintage Fish are not that different, and they share many of the same expensive cards.

c.  People who like death metal like graveyards.  Its true.  I don't know why.


 4.  Is your opponent's deck all warped because it is full of foils?  Johnny likes foils because he likes to collect cards and he likes to personalize his deck.  Spike doesn't like foils because he knows they have a tendency to stick together and give you less consistent draws.  Johnny is more likely to be playing something that wins in a flashy manner for instance: TPS or Time Vault, maybe Steel City Vault--some Stax players have their entire decks foiled out.  Fact: Johnny keeps loose hands more than spike does, because Johnny likes to "play the game" and see what happens.  I am more likely to keep a borderline hand against somebody who appears to have a lot of foils than not...  especially on the draw.


5. Have you ever heard of your opponent?  For instance, maybe you've never met Smennen before but you get paired up against him in a tournament.  You've heard of him and you know that he's written many articles on SCG about TPS.  You might assume that you would want to keep a hand against him that is passable knowing you might be playing against TPS.  However, this can obviously backfire.  I got paired up against Eric Becker at SCG Roanoke a few years ago in the first round.  I know Eric from playing Vintage and we small talk before the match.  At this point in time I had played Control Slaver in probably 25 straight events and had been doing really well with it.  I say:  "Kind of a drag we have to play in round one...  I was hoping meet you in round seven ready to draw into top 8."  He says:  "Yeah, I hear you.  But, its all good; I figure I've got an ok match up here."  (Because he almost always played Tendrils at that time).  I win the die roll and lead off with Dark Ritual into Necropotence.  It was pretty funny because his jaw kind of dropped and the expression on his face was like: "you are not supposed to do that!"  After the game he said:  "I kept a slow hand with Desire because I figured you were playing Slaver."

Or, at the GP two weeks ago I got paired up against a guy who knew who I was because he plays Vintage.  He knew that I have a strong preference for Mana Drain based control decks, and used that information while deciding to keep his hand.  Since he assumed that I would be playing UW control he was comfortable keeping a hand without Spreading Seas or Wall of Omens on the draw, where the only early action was turn 3 Cancel and Turn 4 Jace with lots of land.  Albiet this is good in the UW mirror, he was unpleasantly surprised when I ran him over with turn 2 Putrid Leech, Turn 3 Thranax, and Turn 4 Bloodbraid Elf.  He was completely dead, and after the game admitted he had kept the hand solely because he was sure I would be playing UW.

So, you can't just use these kinds of tips as your basis for making decisions.  They are only useful when you have options and you are unsure which one is right.  For instance, if you have a hand that is passable (Force of Will, Drain, and Ponder or something) but the mana is a little shaky and its a coinflip whether you should run it or ship it, if your opponent is a 20 years old, he didn't want to talk to you before the match, he's got clean pink sleeves, and you can tell he doesn't play foils--from this you might infer that there is a higher probability that he's playing Noble Fish and that you don't want to risk the game against somebody who seems more likely than somebody else to be playing with Wasteland and Null Rod.

Inversely, you have the same hand and your opponent looks to be mid twenties, he cracked a few jokes with you before the match, you can tell his deck has lots of foils in it, he has clean black lotus sleeves but his shuffling was a little bit loose (he didn't pile shuffle 100 miles an hour and didn't riffle shuffle his deck 5 times every three seconds without looking at it).  In this situation I might consider risking playing the hand because I'm less likely to have my mana attacked and he's probably playing a slower drain deck.





The problem with looking for these kinds of tells is that they can backfire as often as they give you advantage because they are never absolute.  Pre-game one imperfect information is really only useful if it helps reinforce a correct decision about whether or not you should mulligan, or how you should play the first turn when on the play.  Rather than try to make plays or keep hands based upon what you think your opponent might be playing, it is usually better to make decisions based upon the quality of what plays your hand will produce.

The types of questions I tend to ask myself when I look at an opening hand are:

1. Can I beat a Wasteland?
2. Can I beat a Force of Will?
3. Does this hand DO anything in the first two turns?  If so what can it produce?
4.  Can I beat a Chalice of the Void for 0 on the draw?
etc.

You should always be more worried about what your hand does, what it produces, what it is weak against; rather than trying to figure out if it is specifically good against a particular archetype that you MIGHT be playing against.  The imperfect information about what they might be running should only be used to confirm a play or decision that is right the majority of the time, or to be a deciding factor in a decision where you don't actually know if one decision is MORE right than another, or if two decision seem to be equally correct unless your opponent is playing a specific deck. 

For instance your hand is Underground Sea, Island, Dark Ritual, Mox Sapphirel, Duress, Necropotence, Force of Will, and you are on the play.  Are you going to Duress or cast Necropotence on the first turn against an unknown match up?  Are you going to play Sapphire?  What if your opponent is Rich Shay and you don't know what he is playing?  What if it is Kevin Cron?  These are the types of situations where considering what your opponent may have in the dark become useful.

Cheers guys.

Brian

[Demonic Attorney]

One of the first questions I ask an unknown opponent is if they are on The Mana Drain.  This serves a number of purposes, some strategic, some not.  It obviously promotes the site, allows me to hear people's views on its usefulness to them, etc.  And that's very good.  But it also gives me some information about what to expect.

If they tell me that they follow TMD closely, that suggests that 1) they're prepared for the current metagame and 2) they're probably playing a "competitive" deck.  For example:  Right now, if you're a Shops player and someone says they read TMD regularly, you should prepare for a blitzkrieg of hate postboard, because Shop decks are getting a lot of attention on TMD, and someone who keeps up with our discussions will prepare themselves accordingly.  Also for example:  Someone who reads TMD is not likely to be playing a "fun" deck.  As FFY put it, these people came to win.  They invested free time in positioning themselves to do well in Vintage; their deck choice will almost certainly reflect that.

Conversely, if someone says they don't read TMD, their attitude towards Vintage is likely different.  They might play the format because their pet Kobold deck is legal.  They might just have come along with friends who take the format more seriously.  In any case, in my experience, I've found it safe to assume that people who don't read TMD will be less competitive players with less competitive decks.


Another thing you can do to try to guess what deck your opponent might be playing is to keep an idea in your head about which players finish their matches the soonest (this used to be a reliable indicator of Storm-based combo; that's less true now that Vault/Key facilitates silly game wins), and which players finish the slowest (I still think this is a good suggestion of Prison or very defensive, controlling blue-based decks).  This obviously works better in smaller tournaments where there are fewer people to keep track of.

The last bit I'll add is how much an opponent agonizes over mulliganing decisions.  I think a good decision on mulligans is one of the most important parts of a well-played match, but it's also probably the most neglected.  Too often I find that players will keep almost any hand that has a remotely viable ratio of mana to spells, and this is all the more true with the more "stable" decks.  And there is how I think mulliganing decisions can be used for information.

Blue-based opponents, especially bad ones, will often keep hands without regard for how long it will take them to get themselves online or how fragile against well-timed disruption their hand might be.  Just as long as they have 2-4 lands, they're good.  On the other end of the spectrum, combo and Ichorid can't afford to keep weak hands.  If your opponent takes a really, really long time deciding to keep a 7 card hand and you don't have any other information, I'd assume it's slightly more likely that they're playing a fragile deck like combo or Ichorid than a more resilient one like Tez.

[Harlequin]

Some people might consider this cheap, but a lot of the time it's as simple as: "just watch your opponent shuffle"
To do this well, you have to practice shuffling while not looking at your own cards.  AND practice shuffling without showing your cards. 

This serves two purposes:  1)  It prevents funny business.  You watching their hands will help you identify "false" shuffles.   But really.... that never happens. 

2) I would say 1 out of every 3 people show their cards when they shuffle.  Usually it’s when they are picking things up, and usually its 1 or 2 cards.  Another time is when they are taking their decks out of the box.   MANY people do it.  I probably do it.  Watching for it will not only help you NOT do it, but it will also give you free information about what your opponents are playing.  I learned this trick when I was playing Meddling Mage, and had to decide to name "Gifts" or "Oath" on the blind.  And trust me, I got more than one person steamy based on my "Lucky Guessing."

~ More recently I've actually started telling my opponent after the match I was able to see their cards when they were shuffling or preparing to shuffle.  Especially if they ask me about how they could improve or could have played better.  Hey, I want them to do well for my breakers right?
If they are very “Pro” at shuffling, then you can usually peg them as being a good player.  At least a good tournament player.  And you can use DA’s line of thinking there.  “Tournament Pros” are usually looking to win, and likely are up to date on tricks and trends.

[zeus-online]

What you said.

By your description i am a horrible player

I usually have a pretty clear cut idea of what i'm facing by turn 2, often turn 1. Their mana base is usually very revealing. In vintage it's even easier since there are so many decks that more or less have to do something turn 1. I am not sure how to describe how to do this though. I might have to pay more attention to what i am basing my assumptions upon.