GRAND PRIX: CHICAGO!!! - Live Coverage

[Omega]

But (you are correct) Bitteblossom, when coming in the late game, can't turn the board from one side to another. Vedalken Shackles can. Yes, it is slower than BB (BB is also slow, you mentionned it), but perhaps the deckbuilder wanted a bomb (removal and kill condition) in those 2 slots. Vedalken Shackles can fit those 2 spots.

Robert

[Omega]

Im not sure if the clock thing can work.

First, they are going to need Clocks (which mean investments! OH NOES!)
Second : To start and close the clock would be really hard and can lead to more disputes (he forgot to start his clock, he didn't start it at the right time, etc.). And what happens when an opponent respond to your game? (Like, you play a play, and in response, he plays a brainstorm, to sac a fetchland, use sensei's and activate CB??)


But the idea is really good. And ideally, that would be a great idea. Especially against slow players :) But I think that it is not possible...

Robert

edit : In Chess, the player only makes 1 move (although he must analyze the board, predict moves etc). In magic, there are interactions between both players

[Aggro_zombies]

But (you are correct) Bitteblossom, when coming in the late game, can't turn the board from one side to another. Vedalken Shackles can. Yes, it is slower than BB (BB is also slow, you mentionned it), but perhaps the deckbuilder wanted a bomb (removal and kill condition) in those 2 slots. Vedalken Shackles can fit those 2 spots.

Robert
Of course. However, I think it depends on your intention for the deck: how fast do you want to be able to go?

Bitterblossom also has the virtue of giving you good early-game defense against creature rush strategies in conjunction with Tarmogoyf. I realize that sounds funny because Bitterblossom causes life loss, but it's also a never-ending stream of creatures against Goblins and can allow you to live long enough to stabilize. Personally, I'd rather take one per turn from Blossom than five per turn from a Piledriver.

Shackles also doesn't work so well when you're under Wastelock/Blood Moon.

Personally, I don't think one of these (newfangled) "Next Level Blue" ports wants to make it to the late game. It doesn't play the control game anywhere nearly as well as something like Landstill or Stax does, so if you go long it means you faced a lot of early-game opposition (a time where Bitterblossom would shine).

Also, Bitterblossom tokens fly. Eat your heart out, Tarmogoyf.

[Bardo]

Shackles is a hard card to evaluate. (Disclosure: I love it and have run it in many decks.)

Burn/combo aside: when it hits at the right time, it can dominate the game and is absurdly powerful. Though, it is very clunky (think of it as a 5-drop, and we rarely play Control Magic (at 4) in this format), and frequently a wasted slot, given the speed of the format.

In Nassif's deck, I'm not sure which hole it's supposed to plug. Four StP supported by CB and counters should be enough to contain opposing dudes and would seem a liability vs. control and combo.

I guess it fills the "bomb" role. Against decks trying to win w/ dudes that aren't Phyrexian Dreadnought, it fills that role well in the late game. If people are going to mess around with that deck (and I'm guessing they will), Shackles seems the best slot to experiment with.

[Omega]

Actually, the first change I will make to my threshold is 4 Sensei's divining top instead of 3.

Seriously, why play 3 when this card is THE bomb? Alot of games are won simply because you have an active SDT. Multiple SDT does suck though. But being able to get that SDT with more consistency is probably a good idea

Robert

[herbig]

I still can't figure out why competitive Magic can't be played on a clock. It works for Chess it should work for Magic.

I can figure it out right off the top of my head: priority. In the game of Magic, unlike Chess, there are potentially dozens of passes within each turn, each requiring you to hit the clock. That would be ridiculously annoying.

Also, there's the issue of what phase you're at, which would then need to be explicitly stated at every point of the turn, lest players get confused.

[Aggro_zombies]

Actually, the first change I will make to my threshold is 4 Sensei's divining top instead of 3.

Seriously, why play 3 when this card is THE bomb? Alot of games are won simply because you have an active SDT. Multiple SDT does suck though. But being able to get that SDT with more consistency is probably a good idea

Robert
What may end up being best is 3 Top, X Trinket Mage. Trinket Mage allows you to also run Needle and EE main, so it's not totally dead if you already have a Top, and it can beat for two.

A fast Counter-Top can seal the game, though, so one could make the argument that drawing extra Tops after that is irrelevant since you've already won, just not officially (yet). Playing four Tops and some number of Mages maximizes your chances of that happening, but I don't think it's a particularly good solution when there's still alternatives.

EDIT: Also, herbig is right. Think of what would happen if two players got into a counter war and one of them forgot to hit the clock.

[Omega]

If Nassif is 3rd best player, who are the top 2? (Im just wondering :D)

Robert

[TheAardvark]

If Nassif is 3rd best player, who are the top 2? (Im just wondering :D)

Robert

Jon Finkel and Kai Budde.

[Omega]

Yea, i kind of remember Finkel. I bought his tournament deck back in the days when i started playing magic. I remember how i kept saying that masticore was a bad card because you lose 1 card per turn. And how paying 19 life to Phyrexian (the thing that put an X/X in play for the life you paid) was probably the happiest moment of my magic career. I felt powerful putting 19/19 and pwning people at my local shops!
Yea... that's before we realized that Voltaic Key, Grim Monolith were like bannned... (or restricted) and that gold bordered were not legal!!

Does he still play?

Robert

[TheAardvark]

Well, he won PT Kuala Lumpur a year ago, coming out of semi-retirement. Dunno if he plays now.

[Jak]

He drafts because he gets free cards.

[sauce]

what a rush, we landed on friday @ 7.30pm, got to the convention center, sleeved up and went down for the GPT but they were already over.
my friend won the last one w/ painterstompy and earned 3 byes.

being sauce, i got 0 byes, and had to grind it out.

i ended up cruising to 5-0 (10-0 in games) beating hugo de jong in my 5th round and then running into a stretch of bad luck.

i was playing ugr (dave caplan list) thresh but with a different sb.
i ran 3 tormod's crypts, 2 krosan grips, 1 reb, 2 pyroblast, 2 blue elemental blast, 3 submerge, 2 pyroclasm.
the only cards i was iffy about was the tormod's crypts... and i never got to used them.

rd1 i beat sligh, rd2 i beat ANT, rd3 i beat merfolk, rd4 i beat grapeshot elves, rd5 i beat ugw trygon cbtop thresh piloted by hugo de jong, rd6 i lost to duncan keijzer running the same list as hugo, rd7 i drew with some awkward MUC list w/ manlands and dominate/threads/shackles main and polymorph + progenitus, rd8 i lost to ugr countertop thresh, and rd9 i lost to extirpate main deck rock/ale list.

i went 5-3-1 and obv didn't day 2.
scott barrentine, one of the dudes with us, played merfolk and crushed.
my other friend w/ painterstompy went 6-3 and ophidian who was with us as well went 6-3 as well due to 2x back to back games w/ enchantress (and one merfolks loss.)

all in all, for it being my 1st GP, i felt really good, especially at the point of being 5-0.
the format is so wide open, i think those who played hate decks like dragon stompy were more successful than some of the legit tier1 decks.
all in all, i expected to see alot more dreadnoughts/loam but actually was surprised to see so much goblins/merfolk/ant.
it was all over the place.

enchatress is a house against threshold... i have no idea what they lost to, i assume ANT/dragon stompy probably?

side note, either nassif is a master or he is the world's biggest lucksack, or both :)

[Mantis]

Players like Nassif, LSV and some Japanese guys just live and breath Magic, don't forget that. While we go to work they play Magic, while we hang out with friends, they play Magic. It's sick, a lot of pro's just get in 4+ hours a day worth of Magic. If a regular Sourcer gets in about half an hour of Magic that means the pro's can do the work a Sourcer does in a month in like half a week. So it's not like they haven't tested Legacy at all.

On top of that because of all their experience playing Magic, they just rock. Let's face it, Nassif and LSV outclass everyone at that GP, they hardly make mistakes because they've played in a ton of tournaments and practiced their habits into perfection. On top of that, they have learned how to bluff and take their psychological game to the next level. Honestly, it's no surprise that guys that spend all their time on this game and are very talented at the same time beat people who just play Magic for fun largely. This is a game of skill, not a game of luck.

Besides, Nassif's board looks extremely well thought out. It's not random at all, rather more thought out than 99% of the sideboards where people just throw in a bunch of 4 ofs that everyone plays, so hey it must be good, without even thinking one second about the expected metagame and stuff like that. Not saying I myself build good sideboards, as I need to improve an awful lot in that department as well, but Nassifs board actually has a plan against every deck as kirdape3 already explained earlier.

[Ch@os]

Are there no Vidz from the GP?
I would love to see some games or coverage reports.

[mossivo1986]

I showed up and played as well with 3c_wish_still :) long day.

I went 4-1-3 loosing game two game 2's and truly tying one game out of that record.

r1. TA 2-0 "irrelivant from the source"
r2. R.B gobbos 1-1 Killed me t4 overtime g2.
r3 UGW Counter-top thresh`1-0
r4 R.G.w.r Aggro 1-1-1 "Managed to gain control in g3, but no kill"
r5. Vile_horror 2-0 "isimaru from the source"
r6. urw_dreadstill 2-0 "r.i.w guy, really nice."
r7. 4c_counter_top_Control 1-1 "tried resolving ee 3 for 5cc he forced, I forced, he pyroblasts, I look at t3 with top for blue card for my second force, fetch look again, no dice. Would have equalized the game out. Instead I lost."
r8. Fae stompy 0-2 He won a trial so without that hes 2-2 for the day :(. He mull's to 5 and we call a judge three times over specific card situations in game and ends up going in his favor on judge number 4. I lose a war of attrition both games.
r9. Drop

I ended up doing pretty well though. Getting enough sleep really helped me do well in this tournament. It had to be the single greatest thing I could provide myself with other then the obvious food and using my 5 minutes at the end of every third round to pee and smoke a cigg. Thank god for slow matchup postings! I really do think there should have been a half an hour lunch at the end of round 4-5 and start the tournament 1.2 hour earlier. At round 8 especially I felt a lack drive to count the numbers like I normally do. All in all the other smaller tourneys ive played I would usually stay up really late for so this tourney getting the sleep was absolutely the best thing I did.

Spent alot of time prepping this december with rockout to try and assemble a testing group souly for this tournament. Had about 30 or so in the beggining but it never truly fell through and I am sorry for those who were let down by its demize. I honestly tried to make it work but in the end lack of players willing to make the little commitment that they needed to make and a sudden hospitalization in my family broke the testing.

props- Anyone interested in a nassif signed foil unhinged island? I cornered him chapin and lsv and had them all sign random cards I played in the tourney.

[mossivo1986]

I am interested in this... What exactly happened?

Just extremely bad communication on judge 1-2's part. Judge 3-4 ruled correctly, but in the middle of a combat step "opponents choosing" so I great completely hozed because I didn't go above judge 1-2's head. It's nothing major and in the end its my fault.

The bitchy greedy me still holds the judges at fault, but at the end of the day I didn't make day two and I lost to fae stompy in the hands of a 2-2 pilot off of a trial win. Worse shit could happen aka I could always just not have played in the tourney.

Bottom line My fault and I am still alittle ass sore. Forgive me o magic-god.

[TheCramp]

I was known as a vintage (legacy really) player in my home town, and decided to go to a big draft. I went undefeated with one tie throughout, stomped threw the top 8 and got sat against the top ranked player in the state for the last round. The match went 2-1 to me, and you know how all these standard players treated me? With respect.

[C.P.]

Went 5-3 with Fae Stompy. Drawing extra card on R7 with Record of 5-1 was not pleasent. But It was fun overall. I also got to watch my friend Alex Wice Demigodding Mr. Nightmare. ;p

[tubagiant89]

I ended up dropping at 2-3 with ANT. Not the best record by far, and I lend it to partly bad matchups and partly bad testing. But I had fun, built Goblins almost purely out of trading/selling crap rares, and watched a friend get 20 place with Dredge.
For a first big event, very enjoyable.

[MULocke]

Went 5-3 with Fae Stompy. Drawing extra card on R7 with Record of 5-1 was not pleasent. But It was fun overall. I also got to watch my friend Alex Wice Demigodding Mr. Nightmare. ;p

You were the FS player? I was that guy sitting a table down who got really excited by your deck (coincidentally, the same round you got the game loss). I was going to explain, but my match went longer. I had just been talking with friends the round before about chalice aggro and how no one plays FS, then I saw you that round. It was pretty cool getting to see the deck irl for the first time.

[goobafish]

Yeah, the x-2's were not able to draw in, and needed to play.

Awesome event. Great seeing all the sourcers again, and meeting new ones. Nassif played very well in the top 8, and despite my best efforts, I couldn't trick him in game 2.

The highlight of my weekend was the feature match against Gerry Thomson where whenever Dark Confidant (Bob) was played, attacked or killed, Bob Maher, who was watching would yell something different. "Thats how I do it", "PROTECT ME!!!" " GET IN THERE!".

I might actually make it to Hawaii, despite never having played a match of Block Constructed.

[kingpete]

Yeah, the x-2's were not able to draw in, and needed to play.

Awesome event. Great seeing all the sourcers again, and meeting new ones. Nassif played very well in the top 8, and despite my best efforts, I couldn't trick him in game 2.

The highlight of my weekend was the feature match against Gerry Thomson where whenever Dark Confidant (Bob) was played, attacked or killed, Bob Maher, who was watching would yell something different. "Thats how I do it", "PROTECT ME!!!" " GET IN THERE!".

I might actually make it to Hawaii, despite never having played a match of Block Constructed.

I was standing right behind you during that match and was doing all i could to refrain from laughing out loud at Bobs antics! It was pretty cool to have him there barning GerryT haha!

[C.P.]

You were the FS player? I was that guy sitting a table down who got really excited by your deck (coincidentally, the same round you got the game loss). I was going to explain, but my match went longer. I had just been talking with friends the round before about chalice aggro and how no one plays FS, then I saw you that round. It was pretty cool getting to see the deck irl for the first time.

Hey, nice seeing you here. Yeah, I remember you being really exited, the deck served me a lot better than I ever thought it would. I think I saw at least 4 other FS players around, and rumors has it that one of them made D2.

[TheLion]

Are there any decklists from the Top132 ?? I am interested in the more uncommon decks like the Countersliver, Natural Order Rock, Survival, 4c aggro-control, RG creatureless Loam, Mono-blue aggro and UB control.
There are listed on wizards.com, but no decklists.

If anyone has info on them, feel free to PM me, or post it here. Thanks.

[Wallace]

Congrats on your finish man, I hope to see you at the next event in the Cuse!


Yeah, the x-2's were not able to draw in, and needed to play.

Awesome event. Great seeing all the sourcers again, and meeting new ones. Nassif played very well in the top 8, and despite my best efforts, I couldn't trick him in game 2.

The highlight of my weekend was the feature match against Gerry Thomson where whenever Dark Confidant (Bob) was played, attacked or killed, Bob Maher, who was watching would yell something different. "Thats how I do it", "PROTECT ME!!!" " GET IN THERE!".

I might actually make it to Hawaii, despite never having played a match of Block Constructed.

[Anusien]

Shackles is a hard card to evaluate. (Disclosure: I love it and have run it in many decks.)

Burn/combo aside: when it hits at the right time, it can dominate the game and is absurdly powerful. Though, it is very clunky (think of it as a 5-drop, and we rarely play Control Magic (at 4) in this format), and frequently a wasted slot, given the speed of the format.

In Nassif's deck, I'm not sure which hole it's supposed to plug. Four StP supported by CB and counters should be enough to contain opposing dudes and would seem a liability vs. control and combo.

I guess it fills the "bomb" role. Against decks trying to win w/ dudes that aren't Phyrexian Dreadnought, it fills that role well in the late game. If people are going to mess around with that deck (and I'm guessing they will), Shackles seems the best slot to experiment with.
Shackles is one of the best cards in the mirror imaginable.

By the way, Andy lost game 2 in part because Nassif is just better than him and managed to manuver Andy into getting his Krosan Grip countered by Counterbalance. I talked to Nassif about this and Nassif is just an amazing player and was like three steps ahead.

I will be pushing BrassMan to write an article for SCG.

[Anusien]

Did you interview Nassif, or just talk to him casually? I'm really interested to hear what he has to say about the tournament and the format.
No interview; I just dropped by after the finals to say hi and congratulate him, and I talked briefly about the Counterbalance play. It was clear he was strategically way ahead. One of the things he said was that he debated putting a 3 on top and flipping it with Bob, knowing that his opponent's best play would be to Grip in response to Bob's trigger. But he ended up making a different play and successfully countered Grip. Nassif is good beats.

By the way, Nassif's deck was apparently built by PV, LSV, David Ochoa and Josh Utter-Leyton with the sideboard being all Nassif. Not sure how much Probasco's deck was an influence; they had at least 59/60 and 0/15 of Probasco's list going into the event.

The real wtf is LSV not T8ing. Discuss.

[Aggro_zombies]

The real wtf is LSV not T8ing. Discuss.
I'm going to ask him about that when I get a chance. I've talked to him and played against him before, and since he's the local pro I was rooting for him to make T8.

[URABAHN]

I'm pleased the turnout was so amazing, I'm not going to hope for more Legacy playable stuff, but I hope there will be more local card shops doing Legacy events (*cough*SCG*cough*). Most of all, I hope we can get away from the ridiculous "Introduction to Legacy" articles.

[Whit3 Ghost]

"Introduction to Legacy" articles.
Please jah.

NLU seems really good, basically Dreadstill minus the fragility. I thought that might be the way to go with that shell after the last Cuse tournament, but I never got around to building anything on it and went back to playing Thrash.

However, I think that some of its success has to do with it's newness. I don't think that it will overpower the format, despite being very good. It may signal the death of CB Thresh that doesn't play progenitus, however.

[SpikeyMikey]

Whether he posted on The Source or kept the tech secret to himself, Gabriel Nassif did just advance the format. Look at his deck (although apparently mainly it's LSVs, it doesn't detract from pro accomplishments). It's way better than 99% of the bullshit that gets posted here. Unlike most people who have budget constraints or CBFd testing all the available cards and just play some deck with "all the best undercosted cards" like Team America. It took people months and years to create Team America, and to fine tune Landstill, and Threshold. In like a week, Gabe Nassif made a deck that's actually clearly better than those decks.

Gabe Nassif found, in a week of testing all the crap that took me months to dig out and test. Obviously he's better at Magic AND at Legacy than I am. Check his board again, he has answers to very diverse decks and I'm sure he knows how to board against them.


Look at his deck again, and his board again, because I'm sure that the deck he proposed is going to be a powerhouse in Legacy for a while.

Sower of Temptation was widely rejected from people on TS.



Was a standard creature base during a GP:C Trial. More importantly, Nassif's mana base is also better than the other guy's. UGwb, people are trying to run 18 land. WTH?


If you don't think a transition from 18 --> 20 land, standardizing 3 daze, standardizing 4/4 Counterbalance/Top, MD 1 Kgrip, Vedalken Shackles in the main, running a totally unused 4-drop, and creating a better sideboard than anybody else is a contribution to Legacy, you're horribly mistaken.[/quote]

I think Nassif is a good player, and the sideboard is interesting. I don't think you're right in saying that his deck was fundamentally better though. It has little to do with his deck being better and a lot to do with *him* being better. A good player can just stretch their cards a lot farther. I think the low land count in Thresh is important. Not getting mana screwed is important, but the more lands you run, the less good stuff you run. The more lands you see, the less pertinent spells you see. There's a balance there, and while there is always a tradeoff of consistency for explosiveness or overall power, in a deck with as many dig effects as thresh runs, the threshold of consistency is greatly increased.

TBH, I don't even think that thresh is a top deck in the format. It relies too heavily on CB top. Yes, it can function without it, but it's like back at the beginning of the format change, ATS could function without SotF, but it was a pretty janky deck sans Survival. Sans Countertop, thresh is just weak. It's only saving grace is that it can usually find and assemble the combo, but if you shut that down, the deck has very little actual game. That's pretty far afield though. My main point is that I don't care one way or the other who wins, I'm in no way shocked that a pro won, they get paid to play for a reason. They're better players and being the better player counts for far more than playing the better deck. Saying they're better players is in no way shape or form equivalent to saying that they're better deckbuilders or even piloting optimal listings.

[tylerwylie]

I went 3-0 with Pox then lost the next 3 after that, to Team America(VERY CLOSE), Landstill, and Aggro Loam. Landstill was always an uphill battle, Aggro Loam drew two Bitterblossoms to my one Vindicate, otherwise I handled Burn, Counterbalance(Most enjoyable match for me, was VERY close and my reanimating your Tarmagoyf at the end of game 3 for the win was epic!), and ANT(Sorry dude from Bloomington, IL, that I drew so many Chalices :D) with Pox. Very fun tournament, if anyone here remembers playing against me post something! Haha.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I do think the bye system is kind of a gip- way to make day 2 going 4-2 while the guy who went 6-1-2 gets boned. Other that, I have nothing against "pros". They play because they love this game; it's not like Magic pays, even at the top, anywhere near games like Texas Hold 'Em, Starcraft, Soul Caliber. Why get upset that someone who loves this game enough to practice it obsessively is better at it than you? It's enough for me that the decklists still rely mostly on community/format inventions, with the occasional new innovation showing up.

[Ewokslayer]

I do think the bye system is kind of a gip- way to make day 2 going 4-2 while the guy who went 6-1-2 gets boned. Other that, I have nothing against "pros".

Everyone that went x-2 regardless of the number of byes made day 2.

[mercenarybdu]

Are there no Vidz from the GP?
I would love to see some games or coverage reports.

No, at the moment. I did ask the coverage team if I could be on staff as their video blogger.

But when they sent me a reply back via email, the email read:




Hi –



My name is Greg Collins and I coordinate all premier-event coverage for magicthegathering.com. Mike Turian passed your name along to me as someone who is interested in covering Grand Prix-Chicago.



I’ve taken a look at your work, but unfortunately I can’t offer you a spot. While video coverage is a great supplement to an event, I need to assign my limited resources at Grand Prix to print coverage first and foremost. I have already assigned my writers for Chicago.



Thank you for your interest and the time you spend supporting the game!



-- Greg



I thanked them of course. But they already give away the fact that they trust only Evan alone and no one else. In addition to that, Greg doesn't even ask me "how was I going to do it?" or "what kind of equipment I was going to use?" Telling us more about their attitude about video.

If you want this to change; flood Wizards' email box like we did the last time in 2007 (w/out the Hulk Flash part). Tell them that we want more Legacy GPs, and tell them to put "VIDEO BLOGGERS" on the ground (GP wise) in addition to the writers.

The event's over, but that doesn't mean sit back, do nothing, and wait two-three years for the next Legacy Grand Prix. Push the envelop!

[ForceofWill]

I do think the bye system is kind of a gip- way to make day 2 going 4-2 while the guy who went 6-1-2 gets boned


While this is partly true in that having three byes makes it insanely easy to day 2 If you prepare and are a strong player you can day two with no problem since you never play anyone good rounds 1-3 anyway.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Saying that it's statistically no harder to go 7-2 than 4-2 can only imply that you are terrible at math.

I'll ignore the last few posts and give everyone a do over on this one. Let's try again;

The bye system is a gip that's just weighted to making the top 8 "interesting" by putting more known names there.

[Aggro_zombies]

Bringing the thread back on-topic, are there Day Two deck lists anywhere? I can't find them on Wizards...

[ForceofWill]

Saying that it's statistically no harder to go 7-2 than 4-2 can only imply that you are terrible at math.


Right because that is exactly what I said.. Anyway my round 2 and 3 match were very easy opponents and then I played nothing but good people until round 9 (my round 9 opponent had 3 byes from a 11 man trial that his friends scooped for him in top 4).

[T-ORGANIZER]

Anyone know if we can see more decklists than just the top 8 anywhere?

[honz]

top 8 here: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpchi09/top8decks

Apparently there is a list of decks that made day 2, but i can't seem to find it.

[RogueMTG]

I would assume they'd end up here eventually?:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Events.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/decklists

as of right now unfortunately there's nothing up there from the GP...

Undefeated Day 1 Decks:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpchi09/blog2#1

[whienot]

Does anyone know if Probasco was aloud to use his alters? He has some pretty awesome Counterbalances, Tops and Trinket Magi that he painted himself.

Just Curious.

[georgjorge]

Right because that is exactly what I said.. Anyway my round 2 and 3 match were very easy opponents and then I played nothing but good people until round 9 (my round 9 opponent had 3 byes from a 11 man trial that his friends scooped for him in top 4).

Beating not-so-good players who might play random decks that are very favorable against yours is still harder than not doing anything at all.

Byes are not very fair. Maybe cut them down to two at least...?

[Anusien]

Beating not-so-good players who might play random decks that are very favorable against yours is still harder than not doing anything at all.

Byes are not very fair. Maybe cut them down to two at least...?
It's unlikely they're going to eliminate or change byes, especially now that they don't actually affect your chances in nearly the same way to make Day2; it used to be almost impossible to make day2 without byes.

They're there so it can be cost-effective for foreign pros to come and play in GPs.

[Nightmare]

I had a single bye, and I'll be honest, I felt like that was a pretty significant disadvantage during the event. Not enough to spend a bunch of money and time grinding, but it would have made my day much easier.

Hopefully this positively effected my total rating, and I can boost up to two or three byes by Boston, because I don't know if its worth going again with genuine intentions of making day two if you don't have at least two (preferably three) byes.

[URABAHN]

Bringing the thread back on-topic, are there Day Two deck lists anywhere? I can't find them on Wizards...

I'd play just about any of the decks that made Day 2. Winning 7 Rounds of Magic at that level of competition seems pretty good. I, too, want to see those decklists.

[yawg07]

Does anyone know if Probasco was aloud to use his alters? He has some pretty awesome Counterbalances, Tops and Trinket Magi that he painted himself.

Just Curious.

Not sure abut that, but my friend was allowed to use the Majora's Mask, Inuyashi, and Master Sword themed Umezawa's Jittes I made for him! :D
I thought of it as a big step for us card alterers. GP Chicago was a BIG DEAL and totally alternate art was allowed.

[Anusien]

Not sure abut that, but my friend was allowed to use the Majora's Mask, Inuyashi, and Master Sword themed Umezawa's Jittes I made for him! :D
I thought of it as a big step for us card alterers. GP Chicago was a BIG DEAL and totally alternate art was allowed.
...
I thought we made the rules on alternate art clear ahead of time.

By the way, there is still serious discussion in the judge community about altered art cards, and the standards are not going to relax any time soon. Monitor the thickness and markings of your cards very carefully.

For the record, I saw one altered card in a deckcheck all day and there was no issue.

[yawg07]

...
I thought we made the rules on alternate art clear ahead of time.

By the way, there is still serious discussion in the judge community about altered art cards, and the standards are not going to relax any time soon. Monitor the thickness and markings of your cards very carefully.

For the record, I saw one altered card in a deckcheck all day and there was no issue.

Anusien, he asked the head judge, who said they were okay.
He followed all the rules he needed to follow. I know altered pictures are really 'taboo' to the game and all.
Because, of course, all of us serious Legacy players don't fucking know what Umezawa's Jitte looks like.

The rules on alternate art aren't even that FIRM, they are flexible.
If the head judge says yes, then there you have it, you're good.

[The Atog Lord]

Brassy opted not to use his altered cards, to avoid any potential complication.

Here's my decklist:

Rich Shay
Ugr Dreadstill
12th

// Land
3 Flooded Strand
2 Polluted Delta
3 Basic Island
3 Volcanic Island
3 Tropical Island
4 Mishra's Factory
3 Wasteland

// Creatures
3 Phyrexian Dreadnought
4 Tarmogoyf
2 Trinket Mage

// Draw
3 Standstill
2 Ponder
2 Top
4 Brainstorm

// Control
4 Force of Will
3 Spell Snare
2 Daze
3 Counterbalance
2 Engineered Explosives
4 Stifle
1 Trickbind

My three loses were to TK , LSV, and the Progenitus deck that finished well on Day I. The sideboard was great, and no changes jump to mind for the maindeck either. Overall, I was quite happy with the deck and how it performed.

For the record, with the recent changes to how people make day II of the Grand Prix, byes matter much less. Before, having byes was almost required to make the second day, because that was decided by the 128 highest finishes. Now, with enough players, all X-2 players make day II. This means that byes do not matter with making Day II, which is a huge improvement. I can see how one may view byes as giving an advantage to more established players, but I believe that with the recent change the bye system is not unreasonable.

And in the interest of full disclosure, I had 2 byes.

Rich Shay

[Nightmare]

For the record, with the recent changes to how people make day II of the Grand Prix, byes matter much less. Before, having byes was almost required to make the second day, because that was decided by the 128 highest finishes. Now, with enough players, all X-2 players make day II. This means that byes do not matter with making Day II, which is a huge improvement. I can see how one may view byes as giving an advantage to more established players, but I believe that with the recent change the bye system is not unreasonable.

And in the interest of full disclosure, I had 2 byes.

Rich, while I agree that the system is better now than it has been in the past, I think you're kidding yourself if you believe starting 3-0, as opposed to 0-0, is not a significant advantage. Sure, you can still do it, but the number of people who make day two with no byes is much, much smaller than the number who make it with three, or even two.

[cdr]

The two "legacy players" that made T8 (gooba and BrassMan) both won trials to get 3 byes. 3 byes is a huge, huge advantage, and the new day 2 cut policy did not change that at all. All of four people made the cut with the new policy that wouldn't have under the old.

I have played in I think eight GPs and missed day two in four or five of those by one win, all of them with zero byes. I will not be playing in a GP without minimum two byes - otherwise the odds are just stacked way too much against you both for making day two and especially for top 8ing.

[Bardo]

No real content to add here, just that I'm amazed that this thread went from nothing to 31,000 views and 550+ posts in three days' time.

Congrats on the finish, Rich. :) The 2-ofs seem odd to me (mainly Top and Daze), but it worked for you.

[Nightmare]

No real content to add here, just that I'm amazed that this thread went from nothing to 31,000 views and 550+ posts in three days' time.
Probably because people came home.

[ForceofWill]

I guess I'll give my decklist too.

2 Volcanic Island
3 Tropical Island
3 Flooded Strand
3 Polluted Delta
3 Island
3 Wasteland
4 Mishra's Factory

4 Tarmogoyf
3 Phyrexian Dreadnought
2 Trinket Mage

4 Counterbalance
3 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Standstill
2 Engineered Explosives

4 Force of Will
3 Spell Snare
1 Daze
4 Brainstorm
4 Stifle
1 Trickbind

I finished 43rd having played against some very good players including starting day 2 losing to LSV.

[FoolofaTook]

The two decks that faced off in the finals were not Threshold. I'm not sure where anybody is getting the idea that they were. They weren't even particularly close to Threshold variants.

Let's list the differences:

No Nimble Mongoose.
Only 7 counters apiece.
A lot of removal and capture.

But most importantly they had 20+ lands.

There is no way that these were Threshold variants. They were something new that much more closely resembled the old tempo control decks than the tempo Threshold and and Next Level Blue variants that have replaced the old tempo control decks.

They weren't particularly influenced by Landstill either.

They weren't influenced by Dreadstill.

They're a new beast and I think I agree with the people who say that they're going to become fairly dominant at this point.

Maybe we should be going back and looking at Zvi's entry also from the WC. That was also off enough (CounterTop) to make it clearly not a Landstill variant despite the fact that at first glance you might have though it was.

I think we get very inbred around here and miss a lot of stuff.

[FoolofaTook]

I'd say the big archetype missing is Control in general. Landstill, Dreadstill, etc. failed to break Top 8; same goes for Loam & Survival, midrange in general.

Both of the finalists were very controlling decks. CounterTop plus seven relatively hard counters plus numerous ways to take a creature from the opponent for the win. That's about as controlling as you can get. Beats 12 counters every time and twice on Sunday.

[Jujuhawk]

Beating not-so-good players who might play random decks that are very favorable against yours is still harder than not doing anything at all.

Byes are not very fair. Maybe cut them down to two at least...?

...

Only on the source. Byes are to reward people who devote most of their life to be good at magic (overall). And it makes the trip to GP's worth it for many pro's. I assume you think it's unfair because they don't play legacy ever (because it's irrelavent to them), but still get byes. Just like it's not fair that someone who is better than everyone here wins the GP despite not testing.

(get over it, etc)

[Anusien]

Rich Shay made day 2 with only 2 byes.

By the way, BrassDeck definitely evolved from Threshold. He started with UGB Threshold and I convinced him to cut Dark Confidant and add cards that are relevant. Many of the decks I've built over the past year are Next Level Brass inspired.

[georgjorge]

...

Only on the source. Byes are to reward people who devote most of their life to be good at magic (overall). And it makes the trip to GP's worth it for many pro's. I assume you think it's unfair because they don't play legacy ever (because it's irrelavent to them), but still get byes. Just like it's not fair that someone who is better than everyone here wins the GP despite not testing.

(get over it, etc)

You got the wrong topic here, man. I did say nothing at all about pros playing at and winning Legacy tournaments being wrong. Pros of course have as much right to do well at a Legacy GP as anyone else, but the byes actually give them more of a right to do so.

I don't agree with rewarding people who devote most of their life to be good at Magic with byes. They are already rewarded by, you know, having good decks and very good playing skills (unless they devote their life without improving, but then they don't have byes anyway...maybe there should be byes for people with 1000+ posts on the Source, or for those playing at least five hours of Magic every week :wink:).

So yes, I find it unfair if someone who has had much success in playing Standard or Extended, improving his Magic skills, gets an additional advantage to do well in a Legacy GP. It would be unfair even if those players got their byes by playing Legacy.

The only justification for byes are that they get more pros to participate. That certainly adds something to the flavor of a GP, no doubt. But it comes at the cost of fairness, plus it keeps other players without byes away from the tourney (see previous pages). And don't tell me that many pros participating will generate more interest in Legacy, thus leading to additional GPs etc. That kind of argument has been proven wrong time and time again.

[atv]

Oh well, the good old pro-bashing again... this elitist crap is getting boring!

Nassif is a really good player. In my opinion, that has to count for something. And he played a Highlander SB! How Awesome is that? Cudos!

I agree, that attitude is pretty tiresome, and it's certainly not helping the format.

Nassif winning the GP is the best kind of advertising Legacy can get, and there was nothing undeserved about it either.

[georgjorge]

Nassif IS a great player, but how is him winning the best advertising for Legacy? I don't think it attracts people to Legacy more than if they saw "LegacyPlayer XXX" beat Nassif in the finals, so there would be some unknown face on the front page of the coverage*.

*People are getting a bit nervous around here, so the disclaimer: the above post questioned the usefulness of Nassif's win for the promotion of the format, not his skills, attitude, or size of his genitals.

[e1567]

Well hot damn this thread just exploded I just started reading it yesterday.

So I went to this event and did pretty fucking awesome for being a legacy enthusiast. I placed 20th with ichorid and I had no byes at all. If you look at my tie breakers they were awful because I didn't have the byes but it just gave me a tingling sensation that I did well against pros and semipros. I really dont mind the lack of byes I was just thrilled to be part of a huge tourny.

Now I guess I am a semi pro with 2 pro points(I had no clue what this meant until I asked a judge what it meant, since I only play legacy its really just bragging rights as far as I am able to understand). I hope everyone who attended has as much fun as I did.

Does anyone know what the next major legacy event might be I thought I heard someone say at GP Chicago the next one is in Tennesse but I have no clue if that is substantial. Now since I will have byes I might as well start looking forward to the next big legacy tourny:cool: .

[Skeggi]

Nassif IS a great player, but how is him winning the best advertising for Legacy? I don't think it attracts people to Legacy more than if they saw "LegacyPlayer XXX" beat Nassif in the finals, so there would be some unknown face on the front page of the coverage*.
Legacy has with quite some people the image of being a random format where luck is the predominant factor. The fact that Nassif won means Legacy is not that random as amny people may have thought, and then they will probably try the awesomeness that is Legacy.

That leads to bigger tournaments with bigger prize support, and because we beat the random people who just started Legacy, it means free duals for us for a while.

Well...at least that's the theory :wink:.

[Jujuhawk]

Nassif IS a great player, but how is him winning the best advertising for Legacy? I don't think it attracts people to Legacy more than if they saw "LegacyPlayer XXX" beat Nassif in the finals, so there would be some unknown face on the front page of the coverage*.

*People are getting a bit nervous around here, so the disclaimer: the above post questioned the usefulness of Nassif's win for the promotion of the format, not his skills, attitude, or size of his genitals.

You just don't understand. Legacy has been a format that's thought of as the format "anyone can win in" because all the decks suck and it's about matchups. When a good player wins that usually means that skill is involved, and it's not just the above.

[Jujuhawk]

You got the wrong topic here, man. I did say nothing at all about pros playing at and winning Legacy tournaments being wrong. Pros of course have as much right to do well at a Legacy GP as anyone else, but the byes actually give them more of a right to do so.

I don't agree with rewarding people who devote most of their life to be good at Magic with byes. They are already rewarded by, you know, having good decks and very good playing skills (unless they devote their life without improving, but then they don't have byes anyway...maybe there should be byes for people with 1000+ posts on the Source, or for those playing at least five hours of Magic every week :wink:).

So yes, I find it unfair if someone who has had much success in playing Standard or Extended, improving his Magic skills, gets an additional advantage to do well in a Legacy GP. It would be unfair even if those players got their byes by playing Legacy.

The only justification for byes are that they get more pros to participate. That certainly adds something to the flavor of a GP, no doubt. But it comes at the cost of fairness, plus it keeps other players without byes away from the tourney (see previous pages). And don't tell me that many pros participating will generate more interest in Legacy, thus leading to additional GPs etc. That kind of argument has been proven wrong time and time again.

It's not just pro's, it's other people too. I have personal friends that only attend GP's far away because they have byes. Just because you don't have any, or whatever, doesn't justify that they shouldn't exist. I personally think it's totally fine to have a bye system, it attracts a LOT of people to go from coast -> coast for GP's, or long distance traveling.

[georgjorge]

Honestly, that's the first time I've heard about those misconceptions about Legacy, but I'm sure you're right about them (no sarcasm). I don't know where those are coming from...I can see people having those image of Vintage, what with all the one-ofs floating around, but why should Legacy be more luck-based than other formats?

Maybe people will look at the coverage and say "Hey, Nassif won that one, so it must be a good format!". But I doubt that. The response I anticipate would just be "Hey, Nassif won another tournament in a format he doesn't even play, he's just so good" (nothing wrong with that one). Well-known pros winning leading to a greater attraction of Legacy, leading to more attention from Wizards, leading to more Legacy GPs seems a rather blurred connection (especially knowing Wizards' stance on Legacy), while byes giving players an unjustified edge over others is rather obvious. I'd love to have more support from Wizards (or just to get a GP in Europe for once), but I don't really believe it.

[Skeggi]

why should Legacy be more luck-based than other formats?
Legacy has by far the largest pool of viable decks. That makes the meta always unpredictable. Some people think you need luck with your match-ups. This is ofcourse wrong: luck helps, but a deck that's good against a great portion of the field and know-how on how to play it still weigh alot stronger than simply having luck with match-ups. Nassif 'proved' this.

[Nightmare]

This page is dangerously close to being chewed up and spit out by me. Keep your shit together, people, because I've about had it.

[Nightmare]

Also, my report is up.

http://saltcitymagic.blogspot.com/

[dahcmai]

Just to put an end to that pro-bashing. I know Pat Chapin and have for a really long time. Gabe is Pat's roommate. He plays quite a bit of eternal formats, just doesn't post here. Pat is a huge fan of Vintage and plays that more than anything else. Gabriel tests against Pat and Brian DeMars (another big eternal player). So if it's any consolation, he does play eternal also. So technically an eternal player did win. He is just damned good at all formats and well face it, it's been a while since we had anything relating to legacy at all to prove his worth at.

[Nihil Credo]

Wait, Nassif lives in the USA now?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

...

Only on the source.

Really? I've heard this from non-Legacy players. I've certainly never heard anyone complain that the Pro Tours should have byes, for instance. I think there's a general consensus that byes lower the legitimacy, from a competitive viewpoint, of the GPs.


Byes are to reward people who devote most of their life to be good at magic (overall). And it makes the trip to GP's worth it for many pro's.

But pros have the Pro Tour to reward effort. GPs are supposed to be accessible to the common man, yet without byes your chances of Day 2 are literally a fraction of what they are if you have 3 byes, assuming exactly equal amounts of skill and preparation.


I assume you think it's unfair because they don't play legacy ever (because it's irrelavent to them), but still get byes. Just like it's not fair that someone who is better than everyone here wins the GP despite not testing.

(get over it, etc)

I have absolutely no problem with pros having more skill and caring more about the game, nor is this a Legacy specific complaint. It's simply a pragmatic argument; why are you tilting the odds in favor of someone who's already better at the game? It seems weighted on the old argument that Magic is a game of luck rather than skill, which I hope no one really believes anymore.

[goobafish]

FYI:
Got an email from Brian David Marshall this morning which said that he is messaging all top 16 players that he doesn't know/who are Legacy or Vintage players (as opposed to pros). The e-mail came with a set of questions about the format and our plans for the Pro Tour, as well as our opinions on the metagame and health of the format.

He said that some of these will be included in his article The Week That Was for this week. So we can look forward to a Legacy article on wizards.com this week!

[MULocke]

FYI:
Got an email from Brian David Marshall this morning which said that he is messaging all top 16 players that he doesn't know/who are Legacy or Vintage players (as opposed to pros). The e-mail came with a set of questions about the format and our plans for the Pro Tour, as well as our opinions on the metagame and health of the format.

He said that some of these will be included in his article The Week That Was for this week. So we can look forward to a Legacy article on wizards.com this week!

Sweet, at least we'll get one. Well, I guess we can also count on one with Flores all over counterbalance's nuts as well.

[PTPaul]

The other thing to keep in mind about how many people made day 2 is the fact that there were 1230 players, 50% more than the necessary 800 to offer 124 people the ability to get into day 2.

As far as byes go, people who have earned a high rating by playing well over a period of time, who have worked hard to be successful at the PT or earned the appropriate amount of points, or won a GP Trial should be able to have the appripriate amount of byes and a small advantage over someone who hasn't invested the same amount of time into the event.

I did a rough count and I found roughly 30 names that I recognized as having byes that made day 2, I could be off by quite a bit since the player list is no longer available and that often includes the number of byes each player has.

Anywho, I started writing this yesterday so I think I lost my train of thought.

Byes are an integral part to help motivate people to travel great distances to events like this. I had 1 bye and went 4-0, 0-4, with a final record of 5-4 missing day 2 by 2 wins. Needless to say beating Heezy in round 4 was a blast but not as much fun as making day two like he did. lol

[georgjorge]

Ok, so both sides of the argument on byes have been made, and keep repeating themselves. I'll leave it alone now.


Also, my report is up.

http://saltcitymagic.blogspot.com/

Nice report! Those crucial mistakes hurt...myself, I usually know the correct play in a certain situation 1 second after I make the incorrect one. I'm not sure how I can improve this, since I know the correct play, it just enters my mind too late to be made.

[Aggro_zombies]

Nice report! Those crucial mistakes hurt...myself, I usually know the correct play in a certain situation 1 second after I make the incorrect one. I'm not sure how I can improve this, since I know the correct play, it just enters my mind too late to be made.
Make the incorrect play in your head first?

I'd be willing to wager that pros that play slowly do so because they are considering many of the plays and counter-plays that can be made in the next turn or two. Once you know what your opponent's deck is, you have a (generally) pretty good idea of what he's going to be able to do to answer your play. Saying to yourself, "If I make Play X, my opponent can respond with Y and Z, which means I'll have to do A, B, or C..." generally helps you weed out the options that aren't good. Generally, the longer one of those response chains becomes, the worse the play is.

There's also just playing a lot. Playing lots of Limited has definitely improved me as a player because it allows you to practice these sorts of chains of logic in every game. Because the format is small, and there are only so many possible plays a certain deck can realistically make, you can be reasonably certain that your analysis will be correct. It also makes doing these analyses much more important, so you get a lot of practice in anticipate plays and counter-plays.

tl;dr take more time to think and play lots of Limited.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

As far as byes go, people who have earned a high rating by playing well over a period of time, who have worked hard to be successful at the PT or earned the appropriate amount of points, or won a GP Trial should be able to have the appripriate amount of byes and a small advantage over someone who hasn't invested the same amount of time into the event.

Then why not apply this to the Pro Tour? People that have more pro points, and have been on the circuit longer should start out with byes at each PT. Likewise, anyone who's previously won a national or world championship can start out with byes at that event for their loyal patronage.

How well do you think that would go down? Just face it; the only reason people accept byes are because they're the status quo. There's no good reason for them. The reward of playing Magic often is that hopefully you get better at it.


I did a rough count and I found roughly 30 names that I recognized as having byes that made day 2, I could be off by quite a bit since the player list is no longer available and that often includes the number of byes each player has.

This is meaningless.


Byes are an integral part to help motivate people to travel great distances to events like this. I had 1 bye and went 4-0, 0-4, with a final record of 5-4 missing day 2 by 2 wins. Needless to say beating Heezy in round 4 was a blast but not as much fun as making day two like he did. lol

They're also an integral part of discouraging people who don't have them from showing up. Considering that Grand Prix are supposed to be the link between more casual players and Pro level playing, giving a handicap to the people who are already supposed to be the best at the game seems not a little bit idiotic.

Then they're even bigger tie-breakers; I was supposed to have 1 bye at GP Columbus which I didn't receive due to clerical error. I then ended up 69th, losing out on renewing my pro points due to tiebreakers because some other guys had lost as often as I had but won three less rounds (!!!) and therefore had better tiebreakers.

What the fuck, Wizards.

[etrigan]

FYI:
Got an email from Brian David Marshall this morning which said that he is messaging all top 16 players that he doesn't know/who are Legacy or Vintage players (as opposed to pros). The e-mail came with a set of questions about the format and our plans for the Pro Tour, as well as our opinions on the metagame and health of the format.

He said that some of these will be included in his article The Week That Was for this week. So we can look forward to a Legacy article on wizards.com this week!

Ask him about unbanning Shahrazad.

[Anusien]

Then why not apply this to the Pro Tour? People that have more pro points, and have been on the circuit longer should start out with byes at each PT. Likewise, anyone who's previously won a national or world championship can start out with byes at that event for their loyal patronage.

How well do you think that would go down? Just face it; the only reason people accept byes are because they're the status quo. There's no good reason for them. The reward of playing Magic often is that hopefully you get better at it.
People can win airfare to PTs and they also don't cost anything to enter.

[Jujuhawk]

if people honestly go to a GP and feel disadvantaged because they have a bye, then I have nothing to say, the same goes for not going all together because of no byes. It doesn't affect anyone but the person who gets the bye. 7-2 makes day 2, regardless of anything. People with byes used to have an edge in tiebreakers for day 2, but this is irrelavent now. The only time it comes back is in cut top top 8, or whatever, but tiebreakers suck, there's no way around it regardless.

The big thing is it gives perks to people who travel long distances, which is a HUGE deal to some people, whether you know anyone it affects or not. I have personal friends that travel around the country to play in GP's, and I'm sure they wouldn't go if byes didn't exist.

[Seriously]

I have personal friends that travel around the country to play in GP's,

yeah, thanks, you've said that like over 9000 times in this thread alone.


and I'm sure they wouldn't go if byes didn't exist.

yeah, it must suck to have to play as many rounds as the other 95% of the people there have to do.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I have nothing to say

I've never understood why some people try to make a virtue out of their lack of a counterargument.

Question: What do you think of the idea of giving everyone a three-round bye, since it doesn't affect making day 2?

Also, the barn routine is old. You know who brags about how much time they spend training and playing with pro players? People that are too incompetent to become pros. Anyone else who spent that much time at it and cared would find a way to attain accomplishments of their own.

[Bardo]

If I was going to be completely fucking hardcore about this game, do whatever it takes to make the PT circuit, and bust my ass on this nerdly pastime, byes seems like a perfectly fine form of compensation from Hasbro/WOTC. "Thank you for cashing in a lot of your life for this game, have some byes." Seems fair to me.

Of course 3-byes increases your changes for making Day 2. I can't think of an argument to counter this, nor do I think there's anything wrong with it either. Correlation between PT level/rating, byes, tournament attendance of professional players and generating "stars" for marketing and recruitment purposes doesn't seem unlikely.

Succinctly, what is the argument of awarding byes on the basis of rating?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

If you're going to argue that biasing the GP results in favor of pros (or simply those with high ratings, I don't particularly care which) is a short term incentive from Wizards to get people invested in the game, I can't particularly counter that. I simply think it drags down the gamesmanship and legitimacy of the event itself. Give them more free cards or t-shirts if you want to reward people for power leveling, the event itself should reward skill only.

[Nihil Credo]

The 'bye question' is more one of form than substance. It's reasonable to give some advantages to encourage good players from all over the world to come; however, it just feels wrong to have an 'open' tournament where some players participate with drastically improved tiebreakers. You can kind of see the extra three rounds of play as a sort of "mini-PTQ" that pros get to skip, like for the Pro Tour - but on the Pro Tour, once you do qualify, the rules are the same for everyone.


How about just erasing scores between Day 1 and Day 2? Since making Day 2 does not rely on tiebreakers (at least if you're X-2 or better), we enable someone who went 7-2 over nine rounds to make a run for the Top 8 on equal footing with people with byes.


Also, while it does not fix our issue in the same measure, here's another change I think should actually apply to *any* tournament: stop assigning byes a 100% Opponent Match Win score. After you've played one actual game round, your tiebreakers are determined only by the actual, physical opponents you have played, rather than being artificially inflated. Is there any serious argument to be made against this one?

[Bardo]

I simply think it drags down the gamesmanship and legitimacy of the event itself.

Yeah, I see your point and don't disagree.

The practice of awarding byes on the basis of rating or "level" or whatever naturally populates the top standings with a certain class of player (the hardcore). As I said, I think it's fair compensation for investment in the game but the idea was likely cooked up their marketing and branding team. While it creates a sort of "entitlement" system, there's a bigger picture logic and agenda at play here, one that has less to do with the integrity of tournament, and more to do with certain exec.'s perceptions on what can help keep the game healthy and profitable.


How about just erasing scores between Day 1 and Day 2? ...

Also, while it does not fix our issue in the same measure, here's another change I think should actually apply to *any* tournament: stop assigning byes a 100% Opponent Match Win score. ...

Both of these ideas seem extremely awesome. I'd love to see them debated by people that really understand the issues in WOTC Organized Play.

[etrigan]

If I was going to be completely fucking hardcore about this game, do whatever it takes to make the PT circuit, and bust my ass on this nerdly pastime, byes seems like a perfectly fine form of compensation from Hasbro/WOTC. "Thank you for cashing in a lot of your life for this game, have some byes." Seems fair to me.


I think the argument is that the people who invest a lot of time into the game dont NEED the byes, as they should be better than the average player, having invested a lot time into the game. It also creates a barrier for entry, as it becomes more difficult to do well without byes.

[Anusien]

Also, while it does not fix our issue in the same measure, here's another change I think should actually apply to *any* tournament: stop assigning byes a 100% Opponent Match Win score. After you've played one actual game round, your tiebreakers are determined only by the actual, physical opponents you have played, rather than being artificially inflated. Is there any serious argument to be made against this one?
I believe that byes don't count to tiebreaks at all. It's not that byes give you 100% OMW, it's that you don't have to play shitty opponents who are going to go 0-3 drop. Your first matches are against opponents who also started out 3-0 instead of 0-1.

Erasing records between Day 1 and Day 2 eliminates awesome storytelling potential. Look at the reward Probasco got for going 9-0 day one; he had a better chance at making it to the top 8. Those sorts of stories are what motivates players.

[rockout]

I have a question about GPs in general. How many people normally show up to a limited gp or a gp in general? I know GP:C was the biggest US GP but what's an average number if anyone knows.

[Bardo]

I have a question about GPs in general. How many people normally show up to a limited gp or a gp in general? I know GP:C was the biggest US GP but what's an average number if anyone knows.

I had the same question and checked the last 6-10 North American GPs. Seems like most were between 600 and 850 or so players. At 1228, GP Chicago had the most players -- it's awesome it was Legacy.

[rockout]

Coo ty bardo

[Jujuhawk]

I've never understood why some people try to make a virtue out of their lack of a counterargument.

Question: What do you think of the idea of giving everyone a three-round bye, since it doesn't affect making day 2?

Also, the barn routine is old. You know who brags about how much time they spend training and playing with pro players? People that are too incompetent to become pros. Anyone else who spent that much time at it and cared would find a way to attain accomplishments of their own.

Giving everyone a 3 round bye destroys the point. Like I said, I'm pretty sure the main reason is that it attracts people to travel long distances because they are awarded with these byes. Byes make GP's worth it for a lot of people, and they're rewarding players that pretty much devote their life to the game.

I'm not barning, I'm using examples. I'm not saying I spend time with pro's or have the latest inside tech because of my friends, I'm using them as an example of the interest of traveling to GP's, since the interest isn't a personal one. I'm saying there are people out there (some I happen to be friends with, so that means I know what I'm talking about, not just pulling shit out of my ass.) are attracted to GP's because of byes, and would not travel so much if they didn't exist.


yeah, thanks, you've said that like over 9000 times in this thread alone.



yeah, it must suck to have to play as many rounds as the other 95% of the people there have to do.

Like I said, get better. Byes reward players who take the time to play in a ton of events and get high ratings/ pro level, and you're not really deserving of a reward if you don't take the time to contribute to events and stuff.

But then again, you're the one that was sad that a pro won this tournament, so everything you say is pretty much going in one ear and out the other.

Basically my argument is based around people going to GP's that are a long distance away, so if you don't want to hear it, don't comment about it :\.

[dahcmai]

Originally Posted by Nihil
How about just erasing scores between Day 1 and Day 2? ...


I'd be kind of annoyed to make day 2 and then lose out to tiebreakers for the top 8 to someone that came into day 2 with a worse record.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I'd be kind of annoyed to make day 2 and then lose out to tiebreakers for the top 8 to someone that came into day 2 with a worse record.

Like, you mean, coming in 7-2 and losing out to someone who came in at 2 in the afternoon and went 4-2?


Giving everyone a 3 round bye destroys the point.

No shit, there I was.

[Nihil Credo]

I'd be kind of annoyed to make day 2 and then lose out to tiebreakers for the top 8 to someone that came into day 2 with a worse record.
I don't doubt that, but look at it this way: which is more annoying, missing Top 8 to someone who performed better than you today and worse yesterday, or to someone who performed the same or better than you today and had byes yesterday? I think the former would be a lesser evil.

[TheBirdMan]

Seems like this whole discussion comes down to if you have byes its baller, but if you dont have them you hate them. You know every one who is against it would be loving it if they actually had the 3 byes in chi. :wink:

[moxpearl]

Interesting facts:
* All top 8 players had 3 byes. I know Andy P and Dave K won trials on Friday and TK won a trial earlier.
* The one 37 pointer Jim Davis who missed top 8 on breakers had just 1 bye.
* Ian Rogerson had no byes, went 12-3, and got 20th. LSV with the same record got 10th. The difference was $600, 4 pro points, and a PT invite vs. $400 and 2 pro points.

Now, all that said, I think byes are a fair reward for pros and/or regulars who take the effort to win a trial, but just wanted to throw those interesting facts out there. Byes are a HUGE advantage in the final rankings, and I never realized just how important GPT's were. Ian (I think he's on these boards) deserves super kudos.

[juventus]

It's also relevant what rounds they lost in. Did LSV and Ian lose in the same rounds? The difference from 10th to 20th might be due to losing too early in the tournament vs. not.

[Muppet86]

Brassy opted not to use his altered cards, to avoid any potential complication.

Here's my decklist:

Rich Shay
Ugr Dreadstill
12th

// Land
3 Flooded Strand
2 Polluted Delta
3 Basic Island
3 Volcanic Island
3 Tropical Island
4 Mishra's Factory
3 Wasteland

// Creatures
3 Phyrexian Dreadnought
4 Tarmogoyf
2 Trinket Mage

// Draw
3 Standstill
2 Ponder
2 Top
4 Brainstorm

// Control
4 Force of Will
3 Spell Snare
2 Daze
3 Counterbalance
2 Engineered Explosives
4 Stifle
1 Trickbind

My three loses were to TK , LSV, and the Progenitus deck that finished well on Day I. The sideboard was great, and no changes jump to mind for the maindeck either. Overall, I was quite happy with the deck and how it performed.

For the record, with the recent changes to how people make day II of the Grand Prix, byes matter much less. Before, having byes was almost required to make the second day, because that was decided by the 128 highest finishes. Now, with enough players, all X-2 players make day II. This means that byes do not matter with making Day II, which is a huge improvement. I can see how one may view byes as giving an advantage to more established players, but I believe that with the recent change the bye system is not unreasonable.

And in the interest of full disclosure, I had 2 byes.

Rich Shay

What sideboard did you play? The maindeck looks really stable, altough I really am in doubt about the two ponders en just two daze.

[Sage]

Byes are definitely a huge advantage that I personally think are not fair. This is especially true for the people that didn’t earn them via winning a trial the day before or a GPT some time before (displayed skill in that format).

Advantages;

-Playing fewer games - Fatigue

-Playing fewer ‘rough’ decks
– Fewer potential ‘bad’ matchups
- Slight differences in deck design – virtually larger SB

-Needing a lower winning % to make day 2
– 0 byes = 77.78% (7/9)
- 1 bye = 75.00% (6/8)
- 2 byes = 71.43% (5/7)
- 3 byes = 66.67% (4/6)

-Better ranking on day two – Better chance at making T8

Taking all of those into account, I think any number of byes definitely gives the recipient an unfair advantage over the rest of the field (11.11% better chance for 3 byes vs 0!). I would love to see how all the ‘pros’ would do in a large event like this one without any byes. Some of you say, “then the pros’ wouldn’t attend.” Well, how many pros actually attended this event? If people would have known that the pros’ wouldn’t be in attendance, would even more people have shown up?

If it all comes down to $(as it commonly does), then final attendance is what matters most to Wizards. So, next time there is a large event like this, try not having byes based on ranking and see how that effects attendance. Wizards could do what Vintage has tried in the past to some success; reward anyone that isn’t a pro that beats a ‘pro’ with a T-shirt displaying what they achieved. I personally loved this idea. The pros may not like this idea, but by being so much ‘better’ at this game than the rest of us means they should win those matches and not have to worry about it.

On a separate topic, I personally think Probasco’s list was the best list in the event and Nassif definitely needed some luck to beat it.

[e1567]

Interesting facts:
* All top 8 players had 3 byes. I know Andy P and Dave K won trials on Friday and TK won a trial earlier.
* The one 37 pointer Jim Davis who missed top 8 on breakers had just 1 bye.
* Ian Rogerson had no byes, went 12-3, and got 20th. LSV with the same record got 10th. The difference was $600, 4 pro points, and a PT invite vs. $400 and 2 pro points.

Now, all that said, I think byes are a fair reward for pros and/or regulars who take the effort to win a trial, but just wanted to throw those interesting facts out there. Byes are a HUGE advantage in the final rankings, and I never realized just how important GPT's were. Ian (I think he's on these boards) deserves super kudos.


Well thank you very much Mox, I was thrilled in the first place to just make it to day 2 but making top 32 with no byes I was told was amazing. I really only play legacy and most of the time just at my small store so I was completely unfamiliar with the large tourny scene.

@juventus - My day 2 loses were early which really hurt my tie breakers since most of my opponents that I beat scrubbed out early. And in day two I lost my first match and won my next 4 which also didn't help my tie breakers at all.

Back to the issue of byes ultimately I think people's response to them is based on if you have them or not (which as already been said). I personally think that they are fine. Byes help the pros go far in GPs and if you look at all of the investment that goes into the pros from WOTC (granted it is less than it used to be) you will understand why they want the pros to do well. Like it or not WOTC is still a company that wants to make money and they see the pros as a way to make money. People follow the pros and their progress then people want to become a pro and to do that they have to play many different formats and spend a good deal of money thus WOTC makes some change off of the pros (no clue how much but if they didn't make a profit they would cut them off).

I think we might have gotten off on a tangent.

Back to the subject I think that the GP was fucking amazing and I only had two opponents that were not so nice the rest of them were some of the nicest people I have ever played against. Go legacy for being the gentlemen format(I have had some bad experiences in other formats). I hope everyone else who went had as good a time as myself.

[quicksilver]

If it all comes down to $(as it commonly does), then final attendance is what matters most to Wizards. So, next time there is a large event like this, try not having byes based on ranking and see how that effects attendance.

Bye's are a big money maker. It allows them to run a shit load of GPT's with the main prize costing them absolutly nothing.

[Sage]

Bye's are a big money maker. It allows them to run a shit load of GPT's with the main prize costing them absolutly nothing.

I definitely agree. Also, as I said, running many, many GPT's and grinders (the more the better Wizards!) is a more than reasonable way to achieve byes as it is in the same format as the actual GP and is increasing attendance through the GPT's. Thus, you are earning your byes in that format and Wizards is making money. I understand that shelling out money to the pros costs more than giving them byes, but the byes are grossly unfair to the rest of us that want a chance at winning as well.

I also had a great time at this and hope that Legacy GP's start to be run more than every other year. It would also be awesome if The Source would run more Legacy tournaments throughout the year. Oh, I went 5-2-2 with 0 byes in Chicago. It was a lot of fun, but the concession stand was a little pricy.

By the way, what was Ian Rogerson playing? (Ubber Kudos man!)

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Seems like this whole discussion comes down to if you have byes its baller, but if you dont have them you hate them. You know every one who is against it would be loving it if they actually had the 3 byes in chi. :wink:

I'd love for the government to give me a billion dollars. That doesn't mean I shouldn't oppose bailouts.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure the number of people without byes is much larger than the number with three of them at any given GP. Yet the former have almost no chance to actually Top 8. How is that fair?

[Jujuhawk]

I'd love for the government to give me a billion dollars. That doesn't mean I shouldn't oppose bailouts.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure the number of people without byes is much larger than the number with three of them at any given GP. Yet the former have almost no chance to actually Top 8. How is that fair?

I'm pretty sure this whole argument is only valid for a legacy GP. Byes are available to EVERYONE. Absolutely every player has the ability to get 1-3 byes at any GP. You guys are all pretty much upset because the only format you play is legacy (not everyone, but most here) and you don't play constructed enough to earn byes. Who's fault is that? Byes are pretty much rewards to players who play enough to deserve them.

[quicksilver]

I'm pretty sure this whole argument is only valid for a legacy GP. Byes are available to EVERYONE. Absolutely every player has the ability to get 1-3 byes at any GP. You guys are all pretty much upset because the only format you play is legacy (not everyone, but most here) and you don't play constructed enough to earn byes. Who's fault is that? Byes are pretty much rewards to players who play enough to deserve them.

I agree. If you don't have enough money to spend playing in tons of magic tournaments then you don't deserve to win a Grand Prix.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

From a sheer marketing viewpoint, targeting the people who are already demonstrably hooked on your product, and alienating the people on the fence seems like poor strategy.

[Jujuhawk]

I agree. If you don't have enough money to spend playing in tons of magic tournaments then you don't deserve to win a Grand Prix.

Anyone can win a grand prix. Wizards is rewarding their loyal customers. Just because you don't play enough tournaments or are good enough to earn them doesn't mean they shouldn't exist. This whole argument is ridiculous anyway. People that don't have byes whine because they're unfair, and people that have them like them.

[Bardo]

From a sheer marketing viewpoint, targeting the people who are already demonstrably hooked on your product, and alienating the people on the fence seems like poor strategy.

I think it's the other way around. They're offering incentives to create and perpetuate a professional gaming class to which anyone can aspire (spending considerable $$ to get there). From a marketing perspective, seems like a fine plan.

If you're not a pro and only rarely play in sanctioned events: win a trial, get 3 byes. You can do that with a rating of 1065 (http://webapp.wizards.com/ratings.aspx?BrandRatedSeasons=6&ratingseasonid=6&action=search&Demographic=1|1&page=10365).

[ForceofWill]

I had 1 bye and I don't think they are unfair by any means. You EARN them.

[juventus]

I agree. If you don't have enough money to spend playing in tons of magic tournaments then you don't deserve to win a Grand Prix.

Or enough money to play and win one GPT....

which is much less than the cost to build your legacy deck.

[Nihil Credo]

Just to clarify my position, I don't think byes for rating should be eliminated - and definitely not GPT byes.

What I do think is that, once Round 4 starts, someone who started with three byes and someone who went 3-0 should be playing on equal footing.

[Anusien]

Just to clarify my position, I don't think byes for rating should be eliminated - and definitely not GPT byes.

What I do think is that, once Round 4 starts, someone who started with three byes and someone who went 3-0 should be playing on equal footing.
Tiebreaks make this impossible. The people that beat an opponent round 1 automatically start with worse tiebreaks than the people that didn't, since the guy with byes has an opponent who has a loss. It's not that byes help your tiebreaks as much as playing opponents who lose hurt yours.

[ForceofWill]

Anyway, I'm pretty sure the number of people without byes is much larger than the number with three of them at any given GP. Yet the former have almost no chance to actually Top 8. How is that fair?

Who said they are making top 8 because they have byes. Maybe they are making top 8 because they are good and have 3 byes because they are good. Where as people who don't have 3 byes aren't as good.

[Parcher]

It's not that byes help your tiebreaks as much as playing opponents who lose hurt yours.


Right, and that is the whole arguement. I agree that the bye system is fair as to whom they are earned by. I also think it is a fair inducement to players from a distance. What is unfair is that the only time they matter outside of simple W/L is in the money rounds. This systems guarantees that a player win the same amount of points with no byes will not cash when compared to a player with byes. It happens every time. This same incentive that is given to pro players to induce them to come to GP's by increasing their chance of making money, takes that same chance away from those without the same opportunity.

[Nihil Credo]

Tiebreaks make this impossible. The people that beat an opponent round 1 automatically start with worse tiebreaks than the people that didn't, since the guy with byes has an opponent who has a loss. It's not that byes help your tiebreaks as much as playing opponents who lose hurt yours.
I know that the problem lies in the tiebreaker system - hence the idea of resetting them at some point of the GP, most likely between Day 1 and 2.

[frogboy]

hence the idea of resetting them at some point of the GP, most likely between Day 1 and 2.

This is an interesting idea, and I was unaware it was being discussed. Is it on the judgelist or somewhere else?

[Pinder]

hence the idea of resetting them at some point of the GP, most likely between Day 1 and 2.

I like the idea of doing it between day 1 and day 2, because with an event this large, tiebreakers don't matter as much as actual match wins when determining who makes day 2 (it doesn't matter how shitty your opponents were as long as you went X-2). Clearing them for day 2 means that everyone is on equal footing for tiebreaks when jockeying for top 8 slots, where tiebreakers really do matter.

[rockout]

Will next years Legacy GP be in Europe or US? I was hoping for both. I'd like to see Germany and France again at some point.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Who said they are making top 8 because they have byes. Maybe they are making top 8 because they are good and have 3 byes because they are good. Where as people who don't have 3 byes aren't as good.

It doesn't matter if you're good; there's still always a fairly high chance of losing at least once in an extra three rounds.

There's no way around this; from a competitive viewpoint, byes make the final results less legitimate. That doesn't mean that someone who gets 3 byes isn't a good player, it just means the results don't mean as much as if the playing field wasn't tilted.


Will next years Legacy GP be in Europe or US? I was hoping for both. I'd like to see Germany and France again at some point.

I have to say that Europe deserves it more at this point, but I'd also like to see 1 each. It's been proven by now that they're popular enough, and encourage older players that maybe have fallen out of the game to show up.

[Phantom]

I'm not really sure how I feel about byes having never played in a GP, but it seems like a fairly common practice in the sports world. Most playoff systems have either favorable seeding or a bye system. Even a so called "open to the public" event such as the US Open (Golf) stacks the odds for the pros against the amateurs by making the amateurs play a bunch of qualifying rounds.

[Nightmare]

My personal stance on byes:
I'd love to have three. If I had three I think I would easily have made day two. You only need to go 4-2, which is considerably easier than going 6-2, or 7-2. In fact, if you enter a GP with three byes and fail to make day 2, you should pretty much be ashamed of yourself. If you're good enough to get the three byes, you should be good enough to go better than .500.

That said, it's definitely skewed to make those with byes succeed. That's the point. It lets pro's ride the gravy train. It's supposed to work that way, which is WHY I want the three bye advantage. I busted my ass in the last week of events that would count, in order to assure that I had the single bye I went in with. It's too big an event to have a shot with 0 byes.

Does anyone know how many people made day 2 with no byes?



I have to say that Europe deserves it more at this point, but I'd also like to see 1 each. It's been proven by now that they're popular enough, and encourage older players that maybe have fallen out of the game to show up.

I think BDM's article this morning was excellent, and it spun a very positive image of the format and the players in it (namely, us). All of the people he interviewed (thanks Gooba!) had positive things to say, no one was really bitching at all, even when posed with "what would you change." I was shocked to see even the "I just wanted to make the PT" guy say the format was fair. It gives me a lot of hope that there will be continued support for the format at a high level, maybe even more than we've seen. I plan to keep an eye on the GP structures, because I get the feeling we're about to move into a new era of Eternal Magic, where there's a consistent Pro Level event every year. Even if they switch back and forth from Europe to the US, I might consider the trip if I snag the byes to make it worth it.

On the other hand, this should also give some incentive to the Legacy community to go out and play in other formats. If you want to do well at the Legacy GPs, its going to take much more than simply playing at our 6 round duel for duals events and such. It's a very different animal to play 9 rounds of Magic, and it's a grueling task. The only place we'll get that kind of experience is at GPs, PTQs, etc. At the same time, this is also your best bet for getting the ratings up to where you'll earn those byes.

And seriously guys, play limited. It's going to make you a better player, I assure you.

[Deep6er]

Coming off of Philly, where I had three, into Columbus where I had one, and then into Chicago where I had none, I'd say that I have a pretty good perspective on byes.

I feel that it is definitely easier to make day 2 when you have byes. That's rather obvious. Even with one bye, things are easier. With no byes, it's the complete and absolute opposite. I felt that it was damn near insurmountably difficult to make day 2. When you consider 'breakers, and the random crap that you run into in the first three rounds, it's frustrating to have to play.

As a strategy, relying on byes to influence your deck choice also seems perfectly justifiable. Compared to what I played in Philly (where everything was basically DTB status) to what I played in Chicago (where Merfolk was the only DTB I played against), it's irritating to have to deal with the extent of unpredictability that's inherent to Legacy, but also magnified by the first three rounds of a Grand Prix.

Nightmare, some of us don't play Limited because of monetary issues, but I know some of us don't play Limited because there are scenarios where your opponent's deck is absolutely better than yours and no amount of playskill can get you out of it. After running into that at a PTQ (in the last round obviously), I was kind of irritated with it. After running into it (in the last round again) of a GPT, I was done with it for awhile.

If I run into a Limited format that really interests me (I hate S-S-C), then I'll get back in, but for now, I'm done.

Also, I wouldn't necessarily say I was a better player when I was drafting regularly. I think your evaluations are different, sure, but not necessarily in an always positive way. I think it's a common misconception that playing Limited makes you better.

Incidentally, the best way to raise your Total rating is to play as few games of Magic as you can, while winning. Your Total rating is based on a formula that includes the total amount of Magic games you've played. Therefore, winning a lot while playing little is actually a better way of increasing your Total rating. Chew on that one.

[Peter_Rotten]

And seriously guys, play limited. It's going to make you a better player, I assure you.

But it costs moneys!

Anyway, I'm reading the article now. What a great promo for Legacy! What's Gooba's real name?


but I know some of us don't play Limited because there are scenarios where your opponent's deck is absolutely better than yours and no amount of playskill can get you out of it...

Wouldn't you say this is more of a case for Sealed than Draft, though?

[quicksilver]

What's Gooba's real name?

David Caplan

[Nightmare]

Incidentally, the best way to raise your Total rating is to play as few games of Magic as you can, while winning. Your Total rating is based on a formula that includes the total amount of Magic games you've played. Therefore, winning a lot while playing little is actually a better way of increasing your Total rating. Chew on that one.

I'm interested in hearing how you arrived at this. I was under the impression that total rating was calculated the exact same way as any other rating, only it compares to your opponent's total rating, rather than their respective "not total" rating, for whatever format you're playing. I was told that they went back into the database, started everyone at 1600, and ran through the history of tournament data (which they have on record anyway) and compiled everyone's total rating based on that criteria. If this is true, then the only way to really improve your total rating is to play and win - the more you win, the higher your rating.

Not playing seems like it would never be the right call, unless you're on the verge of a bye and could lose it if you lost.

[rockout]

I enjoy limited almost as much as I enjoy legacy. They both start with L and the letter forms a right angle...

Limited makes you a better player in a few different ways: how to build a strong mana base. Count up your colored mana symbols and use the percentages to find out the best amount of mana. Why a player went a certain color choice? What's his eventual bomb? Hmmm, my player has a couple cards and hand with 8 mana open, resounding silence possibly? He's got 3 mana untapped and one of them is blue? Do I walk into the spell snip? The ability to see card interactions and know what card is a ... beast helped me in constructed.

And yes, the cost does suck, especially when you don't open a bomb rare or win anything.

edit: I just realized this is insanely off topic for the gp chicago thread. whoops.

[Deep6er]

I got it from Brian Diefendorf. I'll check the Wizards website when I get home to see if I can find more proof.

@Rotten: It's a case for both. In Sealed it could happen, but in Draft, your opponent could have been sitting next to somebody who has no understanding of what's happening. For instance, I remember one time where I was passed Spikeshot Goblin and Loxodon Warhammer in two consecutive packs. Not only does that mean the first guy skipped Spikeshot Goblin (rarely the right call), but the second guy skipped Loxodon Warhammer!

When I asked what they picked in place of it, they said that they picked the rares (Chalice of the Void and Blinkmoth Urn respectively). Thanks guys. Oh yeah, I won that draft.

It happens in Sealed too, which is enormously frustrating. The sealed decks that I've opened (and then had to swap) were ludicrous. That's my major issue with Limited. The scenario where your opponent's deck is strictly better than yours, and exponentially so at that. That's frustrating in the extreme.

Also, monies. Fifteen bucks for a draft is getting kind of expensive. When it was twelve, it wasn't so bad. Obviously, ten was best. But it's definitely getting costly to support.

[rleader]

The scenario where your opponent's deck is strictly better than yours, and exponentially so at that. That's frustrating in the extreme.

I remember reading a hilarious article once (mothership/scg/dunno) from a guy who loathes sealed who opened up Jitte in a tourney: along the lines of "it's never been this much fun being right about how stupid a format is."

[Ewokslayer]

I got it from Brian Diefendorf. I'll check the Wizards website when I get home to see if I can find more proof.


That's not quite what I said.

I said that I had played so many more Legacy matches than Contructed and Limited matches that it was pulling down my Total Rating significantly.

EDIT:
Cool, my three loses all came from people that finished in the top 15.

[quicksilver]

You can go to the dci and view your play history for total. It looks just like any other rating except it's for all formats.

[e1567]

By the way, what was Ian Rogerson playing? (Ubber Kudos man!)

Thanks,

I was playing Ichorid and I was the only person in my score bracket that did not have a single bye. GO under dog!!!

[zuzy]

Hallo,

Where can I find some decklists from Chicago?

I have just found T8 decklists, but I want to know, where I can find for example T32 decklists.

Or I am not sure, but werent there in other coverages all decklist from the event?

Thank you for link.

Regards
ZUZY

[Pinder]

www.thestarkingtonpost.com

He has all the day 2 lists up there.

[e1567]

So quick question I went to the above link, it did have all the deck lists but it was a bit clunky to read. Everything was done alphabetically based on players last name, and it didn't have the rank the player finished. Is this the only comprehensive database or do we have to do the hard work of going to the wizards website and cross checking players names?