Click here. [starcitygames.com]
I haven't read the article yet, but I'm sure it's going to illicit some discussion. This is the thread for it.
Additionally - best performing deck is Food Chain Elves with blue - 66% win ratio! (*one deck only :o)
Last edited by Koby; 06-20-2011 at 12:13 PM.
West side
Find me on MTGO as Koby or rukcus -- @MTGKoby on Twitter
* Maverick is dead. Long live Maverick!
My Legacy stream
My MTG Blog - Work in progress
I would be interested how classic Team America (tombstalker, Stifle) and BUG control (dark confidant) performed. These decks play very differnt and should be analysed seperately to provide information about good / bad matchups. Like this, the TA % does not really have a lot of value I think.
Unfortunately, we don't have decklists from the event, beyond those from the Top 8. The deck classification was done by Jared Sylva (which means he went through almost 1200 paper decklists, by hand, so be sure to give him the props he deserves), and he lumps all BUG tempo/control lists together, whether they have Tombstalker, Dark Confidant, or both.Originally Posted by catmint
However, I'm not really sure that there is a better way to categorize these decks. Looking at decklists from recent Open Series events, there are a lot of hybridized versions of the deck that have done well. Chris Van Meter's Orlando-winning list has four Dark Confidants, two Tombstalkers, and three Stifles. Is that "classic" Team America or not? How different would you really expect its matchups to be?
Not enough love in this thread.
Just wanted to let you guys know that I read your article within an hour of it being posted, and it was one of the most useful articles I've read in a while. Keep up the great work!
Yeah it really gives a good picture. Only 14 high tide players? Wow.
I mostly lurk on here, but I wanted to throw out some love for the article as well. As someone who uses statistics extensively in my profession, I see the presentation of your data as being significantly more helpful than the speculation that we as Magic players often engage in as a result of our perceptions of the meta. Keep up the good work guys.
Sure! A lot of love to Jared for his effort!
Sure there is some hybridization going on, but still I would have made the cut by running 4 confidant (despite of having 2 tombstalkers and stifle). I think the result would have been different, but I wanted to know. :)
My theory: After the sucess from Chris Vanmeters and other players adopting BUG control style decks, the confidant builds where very popular in the GP. Aggro matchups are more difficult for this lists than for lists running the classic build and therefore the bad result.
I can't for the life of me figure out why there isn't more here as well. The work it takes to go through the lists (even a 100-200 let alone 1200) is duanting.They are not getting rich off this and it's a free article....
The community should be more vocal(right word here?) and appreciative of such work. Jared and the Hats, Thank You very much.
Word.
Great article, enjoyed the well done statistics.
Alix or Jesse: not sure if you will read this, but I have been wondering (seriously). Do you guys know if your family is related to the Hatfields (vs. McCoys, etc.) of the Appalachians? Genealogy has always interested me. It is awesome to know where your family has come from.
That's not accurate actually, an other deck hexmage-depths got 66.67% but both of them have so few games that it doesn't paint an accurate picture, either (hexmage was 6-3 and the foodchain elves went 8-4).
Compare that with Merfolks - 678 wins and 591 losses with a win ratio of 53.22% - that is a lot more significant than either food chain elves or hexmage-depths.
It was meant as sarcasm. The small sample size is a dead give away.
West side
Find me on MTGO as Koby or rukcus -- @MTGKoby on Twitter
* Maverick is dead. Long live Maverick!
My Legacy stream
My MTG Blog - Work in progress
Nice article, and thanks for making it free to the public, Hatfields & Jared. Concise, insightful, and I like how y'all let the data speak for itself rather than editorializing it too much.
'Preciated.
Bless your heart, we must consider Blue/White Tempo's strategy and win percentages in an entirely different deck thread. -4eak
Ah okay, sorry it's hard to tell when someone's being sarcastic over the internet sometimes.
Very Very good article, instead of giving assumptions/theory's you guys give hard facts and statistics. Thank you very much!
This was really helpfull!
Thanks, guys, it's always great to hear that other people find this stuff as interesting as we do. We're always open to any suggestions you have as to what else could be done with the data.
As for lists, it turns out that the day 2 decklists from the GP went to Wizards (after being categorized), not to SCG. I'm not sure whether Wizards plans to put them up eventually; they've been kind of inconsistent about posting lists for previous Legacy GPs.
Wizards never types up lists; if it gets done, it's someone doing it for a site or an especially ambitious coverage reporter.
“It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.”
-David DeLaney
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote