Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Deck to Beat Criteria vs. Expected Meta Criteria

  1. #1
    Joe Cool Above All
    HSCK's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2007
    Posts

    664

    Deck to Beat Criteria vs. Expected Meta Criteria

    So, this month's Deck to Beat forum update has Team America, Miracles, Jund, and...RUG!? Using their criteria Arsenal and I have been doing monthly meta analyses and RUG's definitely been on the outside looking in. In fact, it's tied for 8th place in 33+ player tournaments with ANT, Shardless BUG, UR Delver, Dredge, and Nic Fit. This is using DtB criteria to crunch the numbers.

    That being said, RUG is definitely a deck you should prepare for regardless of how it's been doing in top 8s being collected. It's got a long and powerful history in legacy after all.

    So when looking at the DtB forum, should it just use that 33+ player criteria, or should it use all of The Council's results which throw in a large number of smaller tournaments, but may show more of what's being played across the spectrum?

  2. #2
    bruizar
    Guest

    Re: Deck to Beat Criteria vs. Expected Meta Criteria

    I'm all for data. Especially given the fact that second market prices depend heavily on perceived competitiveness of decks.

  3. #3
    Member
    Barook's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2007
    Location

    Germany, Germering, Munich
    Posts

    7,496

    Re: Deck to Beat Criteria vs. Expected Meta Criteria

    Quote Originally Posted by bruizar View Post
    I'm all for data. Especially given the fact that second market prices depend heavily on perceived competitiveness of decks.
    Prices and competitiveness are only loosely related now, considering how speculators randomly increase the price on anything.

    Personally, I don't like the new DtB cut since lots of information is lost that way without looking it up in the actual thread. I liked the old "gauntlet"-type of thing more. Maybe the old cut was too generous, but the current cut is way too extreme.

  4. #4
    Joe Cool Above All
    HSCK's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2007
    Posts

    664

    Re: Deck to Beat Criteria vs. Expected Meta Criteria

    I think the new cut is too extreme and incorrect according to the guidelines.

  5. #5
    Member
    Barook's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2007
    Location

    Germany, Germering, Munich
    Posts

    7,496

    Re: Deck to Beat Criteria vs. Expected Meta Criteria

    Remind me - why was the "Deck to Beat" and "Deck to Watch" thing dropped? It showed at the very least what the top decks of the format were, but also what else to prepare for in the grand scheme.

    Sure, the diversity sucks this month (thanks, TNN!), but saying that current meta only consists of 4 super-relevant decks is kinda iffy.

  6. #6

    Re: Deck to Beat Criteria vs. Expected Meta Criteria

    Look at it like this. With Bug, miracles, Jund, and RUG delver at the top, I should be sitting pretty playing lands since those are four pretty solid matchups... Any metagame that's suppressing combo is fine by me.

  7. #7
    Joe Cool Above All
    HSCK's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2007
    Posts

    664

    Re: Deck to Beat Criteria vs. Expected Meta Criteria

    But the meta is actually much more diverse, look at my March analysis: http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...agame-Analysis

    RUG is not performing that well under the normal criteria, but at the same time should probably be in your testing gauntlet.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)