Nov. 1st DTBF update and changes to the current system

Based on Adept and Member suggestions, we - the Mod staff - are planning a change to the site's DTB philosophy. Barring any massive upheaval or vehement disagreements, this change will be implemented for the November 1st update.

Found below are the changes briefly summarized. I will be updating the relevant posts in the DTBF about the qualifications for DTBs, DTWs, and ATWs.

1. 33+ players and 6 rounds for a tourney to qualify for inclusion (already implemented for the Oct. update)
2. Remove the "American Clause." All Non-American tournies and T8s will count as much as American ones.
3. DTB = 5 placements out of last 10 tournaments.
4. DTW = 3 placements out of last 10 tournaments.
5. ATW = 3 placements out of last 10 tournaments.

This method is a bit of a trial. We'd like to bill this as an experiment to make the DTBF as relevant as possible for all Legacy players. These changes allow a larger sample size (10 tournies instead or 6) and allow American and non-American tournies to influence the DTBF equally.

So... any last comments or concerns?

I heartily endorse this product and/or service.

Nice.:smile:

I'm pretty sure that we can take LFTL-based decks out of the LMF, and that, should we do the math, Thresh won't be a deck to beat. Maybe I'm wrong - I know that there wasn't one in the EPIC DLD (read: I'm pretty sure...), and Europe seems more prone to weird UWb agro-control.

Who among the mods and adepts wants credit for this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Machinus

Who among the mods and adepts wants credit for this?

---

I'll take credit for it, if and only if, it turns out to be a good idea.

Otherwise, I had nothing to do with it.
Not that I actually had anything to with it in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Machinus

Who among the mods and adepts wants credit for this?

---

You're a genius. There, are you happy now? Congratulations, you egotist, you've gotten the credit you think is so goddamn important.

Satisfying your narcissism is obviously more important than accurate representation of the metagame.

Edit - Warning for Flames. ~ Nightmare.

Actually, I was really wondering who has taken on the idea of global Legacy all of a sudden, since the idea was not well-received.

I am concerned about getting credit for my ideas. If I were actually involved in the "representation of the metagame" at this site, I would care about it. Otherwise what incentive do I have?

Wait did Nightmare just give HIMSELF a warning? Im confused...

This whole change sounds like the same as the old system but w/o the American bias, well see how it turns out Im guessing itll be even less accurate than the current/old system, love to be shown wrong though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bovinious

This whole change sounds like the same as the old system but w/o the American bias, well see how it turns out Im guessing itll be even less accurate than the current/old system, love to be shown wrong though.

---

The American bias was where the problem was last time. Now it's fixed.

I'm curious what you mean by "less accurate." The new system is generating it's results using more information. More info=more accuracy.

My only concern is that the numbers for DTB/DTW/ATW status might need some revising down the line if we end up with a barren DTB forum.

I very much like this.

Well if its like LonelyBaritone said and Thresh doesnt make it in, that would make the DTBF far less accurate of what is actually good, and if marginal stuff like Aluren/Fish/Survival/LFTL etc are all in that would be even more inaccurate, in my opinion. Maybe it would be backed by numbers, but wouldnt be meaningful to anyone b/c no one plays in the global metagame, which doesnt even really exist anywhere.

If thresh doesn't make it in, it doesn't mean the system is inaccurate, it just means the threshold (no pun intended) for being a DTB is too high.

As for "marginal" stuff like Aluren, Fish, SotF, etc are making it in; they've been putting up the numbers. As such, they should be put in. I remember having this conversation last month. "I don't think it's good enough" wasn't a valid argument then, and it isn't a valid argument now. Hence why I pretty much dropped the "Goblins should be there" argument.

I think people are taking the word "metagame" much too seriously in this context. In fact, I think metagame shouldn't be used at all. I've been saying this for a long time- the DTB forum should be the place where all the decks, worldwide, putting up solid numbers are consolidated into one place.

Well yeah those decks would be putting up numbers, but the collective information wouldnt really be useful to people who live in areas where some of those decks dont place. I guess it will still be useful as a pooling of the data, and no one really uses the DTBF as a crutch to determine what decks they need to worry about/consider playing, so Im more than willing to see how it turns out, should be interesting...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bovinious

This whole change sounds like the same as the old system but w/o the American bias

---

Don't you mean East Coast bias? I mean San Diego has tourneys large enough to be DLDs, and we have them weekly... Yet I still don't see 4 COlor Landstill have its own DTB thread neither Dreadnought Burn, Reanimator, or Scepter Chant. I don't want to get into a East vs. West battle, but just because few here post on the Source, due to reasons that shall not be named, doesn't make their decks still not DTB. If you take your Global DTB philosophy and apply it to different regions around the world it would be different. So, I hear that Ichorid and Death&Taxes are tearing up metagames like no other but I've never seen either deck played in real life here. Therefore, are they ALL decks to beat? In my opinion, YES they are. I think it should be organized as a mindset so I have to beat deck a, deck b, and deck c, if I want to be the best. No matter where a is, wherever b is, etc. What I'm asking is this: Is the DTB forum going to be a list of the top decks throughout the regions of the world? or rather, Any deck that follows the 5 points you established? Thanks, I'm not provoking flames, just thought.

Why 33+ players? Why not 40+? Or 50+?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeenieBopper

I've been saying this for a long time- the DTB forum should be the place where all the decks, worldwide, putting up solid numbers are consolidated into one place.

---

Well, that is what we have, now, and I'm glad you're happy with it. However, the stated goal of the LMF is something considerably different:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GodzillA

Ideally, the DTBF should provide a reasonably accurate model for creation of a testing gauntlet when preparing for an unknown metagame at a large, competitive tournament.

---

The LMF is now less useful for this purpose than it was before. I suppose it has been decided that this is for the best, but the LMF Philosophy needs to be re-written to reflect that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rack

Don't you mean East Coast bias? I mean San Diego has tourneys large enough to be DLDs, and we have them weekly...

---

This is pretty absurd. There has never been any East Coast bias, whatsoever. I can assure you that whenever the data has been available, it has been included in the analysis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by URABAHN

Why 33+ players? Why not 40+? Or 50+?

---

IIRC, 33 players is the minimum for a six-round Swiss tournament, under DCI rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Machinus

Who among the mods and adepts wants credit for this?

---

YES! Yet another chance to quote myself!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pure Genius

Based on Adept and Member suggestions, we - the Mod staff - are planning a change to the site's DTB philosophy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Machinus

Actually, I was really wondering who has taken on the idea of global Legacy all of a sudden, since the idea was not well-received.

---

Here, again, is a problem with how you say things. What do you mean by "all of a sudden." Not well received? I thought we had an interesting debate about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Machinus

I am concerned about getting credit for my ideas. If I were actually involved in the "representation of the metagame" at this site, I would care about it. Otherwise what incentive do I have?

---

I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you implying that the changes to the DTBF were your ideas and you are not being properly credited? If so, I'd like to direct you to this post, this post, and this post which specifically mention issues with the old method of devaluing non-American tournies.

If not, then I apologize for wasting your time asking you to click those links.

@ ObFree: Could you eloborate as to how the DTBF will be less usefull for its stated purpose now?

@ lack of West Coast data: Put simply, we would be happy to include the SD tournies if they provided deck lists of the T8s. Lists are required for a T8's inclusion in the DTBF.

THe problem PR is that the tourney we play in being FNM basically doesn't require Deck lists. So I don't really feel up to the task of asking everyone their deck lists unless of course they were one of my teammates lists. Ten we'd share. Just thought I'd throw that out there.