Comprehensive Analysis of SCG Attendance

[lordofthepit]

I've been working hard to compile data regarding SCG attendance numbers and to share them in a presentable manner. My goals are two-fold:

1. to provide the evidence to comfort players who fear that Legacy may be waning in popularity
2. to convince the organizers at SCG to better support the Legacy format, as I believe the evidence shows that such an arrangement would beneficial for them as well as for our community

Please provide feedback, especially if any section of this writing or data remains unclear!

http://lordofthepit23.blogspot.com/2015/01/comprehensive-analysis-of-scg.html

[lyracian]

An interesting read however I am not convinced that one Legacy 20k is enough data points to convince anyone (let along SCG) that the new format is a failure. One of the reasons they gave for changing the format was that 10 round (and then another three for top 8) events were taking too long on a single day. Part of the question though is whether the road show is intended to make a profit or if it is just be a sales tool for buying and selling of cards? If card sales is the aim then I would think Standard players are the primary customer they are looking for.

[Lemnear]

Fascinating. I have to work through this at a given time. Thanks for the work

[H]

Since I heard SCG may be making a big announcement soon, I rushed to get this written (and perhaps I am delusional about how convincing my argument may be or how wide my audience might spread).

Well, they just announced GP London will be put on by SSCG in August. Not sure if that counts as "big" though.

Have to really read the article when I have a bit more time, but thanks for the hard work you put in to it.

[btm10]

This is a really great post, thanks for doing all of that work!

I'm surprised that they've lost money on the 20K Opens this year. Unless they're making a ton of money from their dealer booth and from subletting space to other dealers and alterists I can't imagine them keeping the 20K Opens going much longer.

[Barook]

This is a really great post, thanks for doing all of that work!

I'm surprised that they've lost money on the 20K Opens this year. Unless they're making a ton of money from their dealer booth and from subletting space to other dealers and alterists I can't imagine them keeping the 20K Opens going much longer.
They probably only announced the first half of 2015 for this very reason.

It was a risky venture, and while we don't have enough data points yet, it looks like it's a change for the worse for them. Many people simply don't have the time to play up to two days, which hurts attendance.

I wouldn't be suprised if things would go back to normal in the second half of 2015.

[ESG]

Great analysis. When we have access to more data, this will get even more illuminating.


That begs the question: if SCG attendance for its Legacy events is at least comparable to that for its Modern events, which is in turn comparable to that of Standard events, then why is there such a lopsided distribution of $20K Opens in favor of more Standard events?

Let's consider this scenario: Because WOTC wants it that way, and SCG is sensitive to WOTC's desires (Khans names are a perfect example). Even if the evidence was clearer that Legacy and Modern tournaments make SCG more money, SCG derives a lot of value from its relationship with WOTC. WOTC favors Standard due to the format moving more product. SCG probably could scale back Standard, but I doubt we would ever see SCG drastically cut back Standard, even if the tournament-figures disparity were quite a bit larger than it is now.

[nedleeds]

Good article, lots of work. It occupied my morning of bagel, coffee, coffee, coffee. I'm still not sure about the whole sunday coverage drove legacy or somehow expanded the player base argument. a) the casual audience that was going to watch whatever was streaming on Sunday had to go and actually buy legacy cards and come out and play in their local weeklies. It's impossible to determine what effect if any the stream had on overall legacy adoption, it's absolutely not the case in Atlanta which has seen it's legacy weekly dwindle from 30+ 5-6 years ago to now not firing and being dropped for standard. b) existing eternal players I know would occasionally tune in while doing other things only to see the same brainstorm, delver, SFM circle jerk and quickly tune out ... confirming their belief that legacy is / was stale as a day old fart.

As stated above, if the whole circuit is a vehicle to fuel buying inventory we'll never really know how 'successful' it is. Indianapolis next week should be an interesting data point, we were geared up for a roadtrip if something changed with legacy but the bnr announcement was met with a resounding meh.

[lordofthepit]

An interesting read however I am not convinced that one Legacy 20k is enough data points to convince anyone (let along SCG) that the new format is a failure. One of the reasons they gave for changing the format was that 10 round (and then another three for top 8) events were taking too long on a single day. Part of the question though is whether the road show is intended to make a profit or if it is just be a sales tool for buying and selling of cards? If card sales is the aim then I would think Standard players are the primary customer they are looking for.

I think it's mostly a sales tool, but I don't think the two-day events are actually successful in that regard:

1) Interest in Standard overall from their customers would have been strong with weekly one-day Standard Opens or even with no coverage, as it's already heavily promoted by Wizards and it's the gateway format that pretty much all new players are exposed to anyway. Oversaturating the Standard player base with two days of coverage each weekend is unlikely to compel them to buy more staples much more than one day of coverage would have done anyway.
2) The presence of a two-day Open is less likely to facilitate card sales or purchases than the old system. A player who enters the convention center with the additional intent of doing business with SCG is unlikely to be affected by the structure of the tournament, and in fact, if it's causing fewer players to enter the convention center, it likely detracts from the number of potential player-customers.

On another note, Washington, D.C., pulled just 508 players for its two-day Standard event (and I'll update the blog with figures periodically). There is no trend of this lukewarm reception for the $20K two-days reversing anytime soon.

[Fatal]

Maybe I'm wrong - but I see correlation between "healthy of Legacy" (basically printing TNN and TC / DTT) and number of Players on each Event - correlation is very clear from date to date.

[Barook]

On another note, Washington, D.C., pulled just 508 players for its two-day Standard event (and I'll update the blog with figures periodically). There is no trend of this lukewarm reception for the $20K two-days reversing anytime soon.
Modern has 165 players and Legacy 163 players. How does that compare to the data before?

[lordofthepit]

Modern has 165 players and Legacy 163 players. How does that compare to the data before?

I'll have a more thorough update sometime in a few days (long tournament today, probably working late and playing some Magic tomorrow), but that's about what I expected. I thought Legacy and Modern would have roughly similar attendance unless they took place in a city that had a particularly strong preference for one format over the other (Portland and Columbus representing the extremes).

To be honest, I thought there was a very real possibility that Modern attendance might have taken a substantial hit because players might have been really pissed off about the new B&R update, but I guess not everyone is as upset about the banning of Birthing Pod as I was.

[Dragonslayer_90]

To be honest, I thought there was a very real possibility that Modern attendance might have taken a substantial hit because players might have been really pissed off about the new B&R update, but I guess not everyone is as upset about the banning of Birthing Pod as I was.

I'm sure a non-trivial amount of people in the Modern community itself were upset with the banning of Birthing Pod. I know many people who quit because of it. However, there is also a significant segment of the modern community who, while kind of sad to see pod go, also expected it to happen and just accepted it. In other words this periodic banning of the best cards has become a kind of cultural norm/ expectation in the modern community. This is another reason I've sworn off modern at this point until a huge change in the direction of the format happens because I want no part in an non-rotating format where people just blindly accept an unhealthy practice that's only going to kill the format eventually. It's not only because I'm a die hard legacy player that I vehemently reject how Wizards is managing the format. I reject liberal use of bannings for a non-rotating format in a trading card game on principle.

[lordofthepit]

I'm sure a non-trivial amount of people in the Modern community itself were upset with the banning of Birthing Pod. I know many people who quit because of it. However, there is also a significant segment of the modern community who, while kind of sad to see pod go, also expected it to happen and just accepted it. In other words this periodic banning of the best cards has become a kind of cultural norm/ expectation in the modern community. This is another reason I've sworn off modern at this point until a huge change in the direction of the format happens because I want no part in an non-rotating format where people just blindly accept an unhealthy practice that's only going to kill the format eventually. It's not only because I'm a die hard legacy player that I vehemently reject how Wizards is managing the format. I reject liberal use of bannings for a non-rotating format in a trading card game on principle.

Some local players informed me that there is a Modern format Pro Tour coming up, in addition to a Modern format Grand Prix. I'm not sure how much this provides players who were on the fence an incentive to play Modern for practice, but I suppose it could offset any detrimental effects to the Modern player base from the Pod banning. I guess we'll get more data eventually.

[phazonmutant]

This is a really great post, thanks for doing all of that work!

I'm surprised that they've lost money on the 20K Opens this year. Unless they're making a ton of money from their dealer booth and from subletting space to other dealers and alterists I can't imagine them keeping the 20K Opens going much longer.

Pretty sure the point isn't to make money on the tournaments or sell cards on-site, the point of a tournament for a store is to buy cards. Usually stores are happy if they break even on renting the convention center and paying staff. Starcitygames does a huge volume of sales, which is enabled by buying lots of cards at 50-70% retail price. That's where the real money is.


Let's consider this scenario: Because WOTC wants it that way, and SCG is sensitive to WOTC's desires (Khans names are a perfect example). Even if the evidence was clearer that Legacy and Modern tournaments make SCG more money, SCG derives a lot of value from its relationship with WOTC. WOTC favors Standard due to the format moving more product. SCG probably could scale back Standard, but I doubt we would ever see SCG drastically cut back Standard, even if the tournament-figures disparity were quite a bit larger than it is now.

That doesn't seem realistic. I'm sure they have a good relationship with Wizards, and they may even get special treatment with information or prices, but I'm dubious about any conspiracy theories that SCG bends to Wizards' will. They're a business, and they'll do what they perceive to be most profitable. Standard drives the majority of sales, and Legacy probably has high enough margins that it's worth supporting as much or more than Modern.

[Ellomdian]

Well, they just announced GP London will be put on by SCG in August. Not sure if that counts as "big" though.

And GP Seville is *secretly* being put on by Cascade, a close CFB partner. WotC may have decided that they like the way shows are run by the big TO's in the states, and they are exporting that experience.


I'm surprised that they've lost money on the 20K Opens this year. Unless they're making a ton of money from their dealer booth and from subletting space to other dealers and alterists I can't imagine them keeping the 20K Opens going much longer.

It's been discussed (but never confirmed) that the primary goals of the Open series are Marketing and Acquisition, not just to run a profitable event. Most speculation also discounts the absurd profit that side events are run at - I've worked GP's where the event space is literally just paid for out of Draft profits.


The presence of a two-day Open is less likely to facilitate card sales or purchases than the old system...
On another note, Washington, D.C., pulled just 508 players for its two-day Standard event (and I'll update the blog with figures periodically). There is no trend of this lukewarm reception for the $20K two-days reversing anytime soon.

1. Large vendors typically show up to GP's and Opens to buy, not sell. It's been this way for half a decade, and it's pretty well known. Given the logistics involved in large-scale singles selling, one of the biggest reasons to bring inventory out is to get even more cash on hand to facilitate buying.

2. SCG Indy and Columbus 2014 (also in January, and on the East Coast) had 567 and 688 players (respectively) for Standard. DC's attendance was almost certainly impacted by fears of the weather coming in early. I wouldn't necessarily jump to conclusions about events that show expected attendance historically.

TL;DR - your numbers are awesome, but I would be careful about drawing conclusions off of a small set of data. Also, the 2-day system was implemented to prevent logistical problems at events where they expected large turnout (see what happens when we get to May and June) and it conveniently works even at the smaller events.

Side Note: 2 Lands decks in the T8. Neat...

[Barook]

That doesn't seem realistic. I'm sure they have a good relationship with Wizards, and they may even get special treatment with information or prices, but I'm dubious about any conspiracy theories that SCG bends to Wizards' will. They're a business, and they'll do what they perceive to be most profitable. Standard drives the majority of sales, and Legacy probably has high enough margins that it's worth supporting as much or more than Modern.
Then what about the Khans names for established Legacy decks? The vast majority of people find them inconsistent, confusing and downright irritating, yet they won't back up from them for no appearent reason. They also won't apply Ravnica guild names to two-colored decks due how dumb it would be. There's absolutely no point in concealing easy to read information like RUG or BUG in shitty Khans names, other than Wizards shitty marketing strategies.

[Esper3k]

An interesting read - thanks for all the work and effort you put into this!

[phazonmutant]

Then what about the Khans names for established Legacy decks? The vast majority of people find them inconsistent, confusing and downright irritating, yet they won't back up from them for no appearent reason. They also won't apply Ravnica guild names to two-colored decks due how dumb it would be. There's absolutely no point in concealing easy to read information like RUG or BUG in shitty Khans names, other than Wizards shitty marketing strategies.

That's contradicted by published statements by Cedric. They believe that the vast majority of people don't find them confusing, because the vast majority of people are newer / standard players. They're trying to make the names less confusing and more accessible by using the wedge names. It's only to crufty old-timers like us that things like Junk and Raka mean anything, and the new names (which are common in standard right now) are confusing.

[nedleeds]

Not one person has quit or been inspired to play legacy by the difference in calling a deck BUG derp vs Sultai derp. Stop it, really. They have to use those names for the standard coverage because the cards say <TRIBE> Charm and <TRIBE> Ascendancy and <TRIBE> Monkey Raping War Monger asking them to bounce back and forth in coverage is absurd. It's tough enough to bounce back and forth between formats and not get other shit wrong like how Trinisphere works or how Sylvan Library works don't burden the crew with having to jump back and forth between two names for the color pie. Do I think the names are stupid? Sure. Would I prefer if everything used the original legends elder dragons and the volvers. Of course. But it's not going to happen.

[Lord Seth]

I'm sure a non-trivial amount of people in the Modern community itself were upset with the banning of Birthing Pod. I know many people who quit because of it. However, there is also a significant segment of the modern community who, while kind of sad to see pod go, also expected it to happen and just accepted it. In other words this periodic banning of the best cards has become a kind of cultural norm/ expectation in the modern community. This is another reason I've sworn off modern at this point until a huge change in the direction of the format happens because I want no part in an non-rotating format where people just blindly accept an unhealthy practice that's only going to kill the format eventually. It's not only because I'm a die hard legacy player that I vehemently reject how Wizards is managing the format. I reject liberal use of bannings for a non-rotating format in a trading card game on principle.Or maybe there's little reason to no longer play a format just because a deck you don't play got a ban. This might be a reason to not want to further invest in it (e.g. not make any more decks), but unless your deck is directly affected by a ban, there doesn't seem much of a reason to actually quit the format due to it.

[Meekrab]

That's contradicted by published statements by Cedric. They believe that the vast majority of people don't find them confusing, because the vast majority of people are newer / standard players. They're trying to make the names less confusing and more accessible by using the wedge names. It's only to crufty old-timers like us that things like Junk and Raka mean anything, and the new names (which are common in standard right now) are confusing.
My biggest beef with the clan names is that the decks that had these names slapped on them don't play like the Khans' clan decks play. 'Sultai' Delver doesn't dredge the deck and reanimate zombies. 'Abzan' Junk or Maverick or whatever doesn't play outlast dudes and build up a million +1/+1 counters. 'Jeskai' Delver didn't have a bunch of Prowess dorks. They just applied names based on colors without regard to the actual style of play.

It's just as moronic as calling an Ad Nauseum deck that splashes white for Silence "Esper Tendrils."

[oarsman]

Looking at the attendance numbers is important, and I think the original post was really well done. But stream viewership is also critical and is being overlooked.

Professional sports in America (and presumably elsewhere although I don't know) used to derive most of their revenue from ticket sales and concessions. As technology increased and audience habits changed, television contracts became more and more important, to the point where they are now much larger than gate receipts. I realize magic isn't the same and the scale does not compare, but the idea does translate.

In order to offer bigger prizes or additional features, SCG would need to bring in more money. This can come from increased attendance and/or entry fees, but that only pulls from the players who can actually go to the event. A larger streaming audience can also contribute through subscriptions and ad revenue should SCG begin to sell commercial spots. In the long run, this is where the real growth lies. I don't know if this is a consideration for them, but I think SCG is a pretty forward-thinking operation so I would be surprised if it isn't something they think about.

So while the work done here is great, I suggest that any conclusions drawn from it can't be considered a window into the future since we aren't privy to the entire equation.

[Barook]

In order to offer bigger prizes or additional features, SCG would need to bring in more money. This can come from increased attendance and/or entry fees, but that only pulls from the players who can actually go to the event. A larger streaming audience can also contribute through subscriptions and ad revenue should SCG begin to sell commercial spots. In the long run, this is where the real growth lies. I don't know if this is a consideration for them, but I think SCG is a pretty forward-thinking operation so I would be surprised if it isn't something they think about.
I don't think subscriptions are going to make much a difference. Non-slow chat and some crappy emotes aren't that appealing.

And who should they sell ad space to? MtG-related competitors? Deodorant manufacturers? :eyebrow:

A lot would need to happen to broaden the audience to the point where it becomes more profitable. Isn't Magic kinda plateauing right now?

[nedleeds]

The numbers Magic as a whole gets on Twitch are utterly dwarfed by other games anyway. I flipped the Twitch on Sunday and Barbie: Magic Oasis had 30K viewers and Magic the Gathering had 14K.

[oarsman]

I don't think subscriptions are going to make much a difference. Non-slow chat and some crappy emotes aren't that appealing.

And who should they sell ad space to? MtG-related competitors? Deodorant manufacturers? :eyebrow:

A lot would need to happen to broaden the audience to the point where it becomes more profitable. Isn't Magic kinda plateauing right now?


Extrapolating from the number of subscriptions I have, and difference in audience size, I think they will sell plenty of them. As to who they would sell ad space to- there were 17,000 people watching when I tuned in yesterday evening. I buy stuff. I imagine those other people do as well. If they can figure out what we collectively are interested in, they're all set.

Is Magic hitting a plateau? Possibly, but keep in mind that this is with Wizards screwing up basically everything except card design. Imagine if Hasbro kept all the development people, and replaced management and the MTGO team.

[jungleman3955]

Definitely deodorant manufacturers.

[lordofthepit]

Extrapolating from the number of subscriptions I have, and difference in audience size, I think they will sell plenty of them. As to who they would sell ad space to- there were 17,000 people watching when I tuned in yesterday evening. I buy stuff. I imagine those other people do as well. If they can figure out what we collectively are interested in, they're all set.

Is Magic hitting a plateau? Possibly, but keep in mind that this is with Wizards screwing up basically everything except card design. Imagine if Hasbro kept all the development people, and replaced management and the MTGO team.

Thanks for your feedback, oarsman. I didn't consider the possibility that they could monetize a Twitch stream, and while I would otherwise be skeptical of how much revenue this could recommend, if anyone on the Source is qualified to speak on this topic, it is certainly you. I'm a big fan of your stream!

I don't have accurate viewership numbers from SCG Live, as I've never made any attempt to track them, but consider the following hypothetical case. If the new 2-day Standard Opens pulled in 15000 viewers each day (presumably mostly the same viewers), while the old Standard Open pulled in 15000 viewers but the Legacy Open pulled in 8000 (perhaps half of them representing new ones that wouldn't have tuned in on Saturday), would the former still represent a more desirable outcome for SCG in terms of being able to sell ad space or otherwise monetize SCG Live?


My biggest beef with the clan names is that the decks that had these names slapped on them don't play like the Khans' clan decks play. 'Sultai' Delver doesn't dredge the deck and reanimate zombies. 'Abzan' Junk or Maverick or whatever doesn't play outlast dudes and build up a million +1/+1 counters. 'Jeskai' Delver didn't have a bunch of Prowess dorks. They just applied names based on colors without regard to the actual style of play.

It's just as moronic as calling an Ad Nauseum deck that splashes white for Silence "Esper Tendrils."

A bit topic, but I agree that I have no problems when the name is applied to Standard decks or even decks for Legacy when the wedge mechanic is central to the function of the deck (e.g. Jeskai Ascendancy). But the new wedge names have been clumsy and less informative than the previously used acronyms. A humorous example of this is the 32nd place deck from the recent Premier IQ being listed as "Sultari Delver". I bet they wouldn't have misspelled "BUG"!

[lordofthepit]

Modern has 165 players and Legacy 163 players. How does that compare to the data before?

Updated to reflect new data!

[Quasim0ff]

Definitely deodorant manufacturers.
Underpants, covering most of his lower back?

*Whistles, and quietly exists room*

[lordofthepit]

Heavy snow storm in SCG Indianapolis on Super Bowl weekend. Too bad this is a Legacy Open, because I'm guessing low turnouts for all three events.

[eostby]

The snow's not coming in until Saturday afternoon/evening, so the Open might still have good attendance. Not so sure about the PIQs, though.

[Barook]

Legacy got 582 people. That seems pretty good, given the circumstances.

[lordofthepit]

Another update through SCG Houston.

A brief summary for those of you who don't want to wade through everything:

Attendance at the $20K Houston Open was terrible across the board. Only 427 showed up for the Standard $20K, 143 for the Legacy PIQ, 127 for the Modern PIQ.
Of the six $20K Opens so far, four have been Standard and two have been Legacy. Other than Columbus (659), which has always had very large turnouts, the largest two Opens have actually been Legacy format.
This was the very first trip to Houston, so I can't compare directly to previous events in the same city, but within the same region, Dallas has also been one of the best attendance Open sites (at least for Standard). The poor turnout at Houston is especially noteworthy as this is the second biggest city/metropolitan area that SCG has attended (not having been to New York or Chicago).
This was the first time since 2013 (when I've begun charting entry fees and prize supports) that an Open weekend actually lost money based on entry and prizes paid out alone.
Despite all this, SCG's newly announced schedule for the remainder of 2015 includes only three Legacy Opens (and three Modern ones), with a ton of Standard. It's quite clear that if they're paying attention to their recent attendance numbers that something else (SCG Live viewership, Wizards incentives, a desire to affect the secondary market, etc.) is driving their decision process.

[Barook]

Wasn't the viewership for yesterday's event below 10k? I didn't pay attention to the Top 8 viewer numbers, though. IIRC, there was complainment in the chat that the last Legacy Open "only" pulled 13k viewers or so. :really:

Where is the announcement about the rest of the year's schedule?

A few laughable subscription fees aside, I don't think that's the driving force behind their decision. It's probably their incestous relationship with Wizards that's the main cause - otherwise, we wouldn't have to deal with KtK names for established Legacy decks.

[lordofthepit]

Wasn't the viewership for yesterday's event below 10k? I didn't pay attention to the Top 8 viewer numbers, though. IIRC, there was complainment in the chat that the last Legacy Open "only" pulled 13k viewers or so. :really:

You know, I have never actually tried to track their viewership numbers, but I remember with their old system (Saturday Standard, Sunday Legacy only) that they would get around 5k on Saturday, 10k for the Standard Top 8 on Sunday morning, and about 6-10k for Legacy, so I was always surprised when someone pointed out that viewership was a reason that SCG was moving over to Standard (both because I wouldn't have thought that Standard drew more viewers and because I was incredulous that viewership would generate any revenue). If anything, I would have thought that there would be greater disparity between Legacy and Standard in attendance than in viewership (because Legacy is objectively the more interesting format, but high card prices prevent many potentially interested players from joining the format). But I took those statements at face value.

I'm willing to admit that I don't know what the hell actual viewership numbers look like. When I login, I get a snapshot of what it looks like at any particular time, but it's hard to chart that over the course of a weekend. I make every effort I can to watch their Legacy streams, but I'm pretty busy and unable to actually watch most of it, and I'm sure as hell not going to sit through reruns, advertisements, and Standard just to capture this data. It's not a statement to me even if it were incorrect. (Imagine a hypothetical argument. L: "Legacy draws more players." S: "Standard has more viewers." My inclination would be to say "So what?", rather than "Let me verify that.")

[Barook]

I found it rather odd that Rogue, one of the SCG chat moderators, had to emphasize yesterday that the last 6 Opens pulled over 10k viewers. Why is that so important now?

In the end, the SCG Open circuit is not more than a glorified ad while having a chance for SCG to up their inventory. If they can make a bit of money while doing that, even better for them.

Maybe Wizards realized the potential as advertising media and offered SCG some sweet deals (like the chance to host more GPs, better case prices, etc.). That would certainly explain the sudden switch from "Hide the chat from retards at all cost!" to "Buy our subscriptions - we have penguin smilies and shit!".

[Esper3k]

This is just a guess (and we can make a joke about MTG players and girlfriends), but I would posit that having the Open on Valentine's Day also suppressed attendance.

Also, while having an Open in town was very convenient to me, Houston is actually a very inconvenient city to travel to (from a MTG player's perspective) if you have to drive. We're hours away from everything and there's not much of a population to capture south/southwest of us, unlike Dallas, which is closer to many more players willing to travel due to being further north.

It was pretty sweet getting to walk 15 minutes from my home to the convention site though :)

[FoolofaTook]

They have to sell cards for Standard. They have to sell new product. This is true for both WotC and SCG. Anything that they do that isn't focused on selling new product is a waste of scarce resources from a business perspective. The shareholders demand quarterly returns.

[thecrav]

This is just a guess (and we can make a joke about MTG players and girlfriends), but I would posit that having the Open on Valentine's Day also suppressed attendance.


Texas in general but Houston especially has always had a rough time with when big events are scheduled. It makes me just a little bit sad because it seems like TOs want to stay away due to low turnout but I don't think that low turnout is due to location but to time.

Some examples (can you tell I've had this in my head a while?)

SCG Houston - 14-15 Feb 2015 - Valentine's Day, Mardis Gras near Louisiana (we also have our own in Galveston that's supposed to be okay)
GP San Antonio - 28-30 November 2014 - Thanksgiving Weekend
GP San Antonio - 24-25 November 2012 - Thanksgiving Weekend
GP Houston - 3-4 April 2010 - Easter Sunday in the freaking Bible Belt

Also, the upcoming SCG Dallas (which isn't in Dallas) will be held during South by Southwest.

I'm sure a lot of other cities can make the same claims but... I don't live there so screw 'em :P



Also, while having an Open in town was very convenient to me, Houston is actually a very inconvenient city to travel to (from a MTG player's perspective) if you have to drive. We're hours away from everything and there's not much of a population to capture south/southwest of us, unlike Dallas, which is closer to many more players willing to travel due to being further north.


I think it's probably a wash in terms of distances to places. For example, Dallas is more likely get players from Oklahoma City while Houston is more likely to get players from Baton Rogue. I will however give SCG props for actually holding SCG Houston in the city of Houston.

Also, being that the event was actually in Houston, the event was twice as close to the closest major airport (12 miles) as the events in Forth Worth (24 miles) which probably matters a fair bit to those outside of driving distance.

[ubernostrum]

Texas in general but Houston especially has always had a rough time with when big events are scheduled. It makes me just a little bit sad because it seems like TOs want to stay away due to low turnout but I don't think that low turnout is due to location but to time.

I've been around most of the center of the country for SCG evens and GPs. And in this part of the country, the two largest Opens I've been to were the Standard Opens in St. Louis in early 2014 (763 players, nightmare 11-round Saturday where I was the only L3 other than the Head Judge) and DFW in late 2013 (650-ish, largest event I've ever been Head Judge of).

[Mr.C]

Any updates?

[tianyuan2k4]

Any updates?

SCG DALLAS MAR 13 - 14

STANDARD: 763 PLAYERS (LINK (http://8e8460c4912582c4e519-11fcbfd88ed5b90cfb46edba899033c9.r65.cf1.rackcdn.com/www/scg_events/files/20150314122540000000.html))

MODERN: 267 PLAYERS (LINK (http://8e8460c4912582c4e519-11fcbfd88ed5b90cfb46edba899033c9.r65.cf1.rackcdn.com/www/scg_events/files/20150315143945000000.html))

LEGACY: 190 PLAYER (LINK (http://8e8460c4912582c4e519-11fcbfd88ed5b90cfb46edba899033c9.r65.cf1.rackcdn.com/www/scg_events/files/20150315123454000000.html))

While SCG's Legacy attendance seems terrible, please consider we also had a 300+ players event in Eternal Extravaganza 2 (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?28815-Eternal-Extravaganza-2-Coopersburg-PA-27-000-in-prizes!-March-13-15&p=872710&viewfull=1#post872710) past weekend.

[HSCK]

237, not 267 for Modern from what the sheet says, just a little more than Legacy.

[lordofthepit]

Any updates?

I've been making edits to my original blog post (which are explicitly noted with date of edit) as events trickle in. I've been pretty busy recently, so there's usually a few days or a week of lag time, but I'll hopefully get something written for Dallas soon.


SCG DALLAS MAR 13 - 14

STANDARD: 763 PLAYERS (LINK (http://8e8460c4912582c4e519-11fcbfd88ed5b90cfb46edba899033c9.r65.cf1.rackcdn.com/www/scg_events/files/20150314122540000000.html))

MODERN: 267 PLAYERS (LINK (http://8e8460c4912582c4e519-11fcbfd88ed5b90cfb46edba899033c9.r65.cf1.rackcdn.com/www/scg_events/files/20150315143945000000.html))

LEGACY: 190 PLAYER (LINK (http://8e8460c4912582c4e519-11fcbfd88ed5b90cfb46edba899033c9.r65.cf1.rackcdn.com/www/scg_events/files/20150315123454000000.html))

While SCG's Legacy attendance seems terrible, please consider we also had a 300+ players event in Eternal Extravaganza 2 (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?28815-Eternal-Extravaganza-2-Coopersburg-PA-27-000-in-prizes!-March-13-15&p=872710&viewfull=1#post872710) past weekend.


237, not 267 for Modern from what the sheet says, just a little more than Legacy.

HSCK is correct. I have the numbers at 763 for Standard, 190 for Legacy, and 237 for Modern.

The $20K two-day Opens have started to pick up a little bit of steam, but I don't think as much as most peole were expecting (the two previous cities have also attracted a lot of players in the past). Legacy and Modern Premier IQs have been roughly comparable, although Modern has had slightly more players the last two events. Standard Premier IQs have had lower attendance than the concurrent Legacy or Modern one every time it's been held (which as always been 9 am, so either Standard is less popular on the SCG circuit than most people think, or the 9 am start time detracts from Standard attendance in comparison to 10 am Legacy/Modern just as 9 am Legacy detracts from its attendance compared to 10 am Modern).

More details upcoming.

[Mr.C]

Kinda wondering how things look a year-ish later. Has attendance suffered at all?

[ReAnimator]

Kinda wondering how things look a year-ish later. Has attendance suffered at all?

I believe their Modern event last week was their biggest open ever with over 1000 players.

[lordofthepit]

Looks like this thread got necroed up. I actually got quite a few messages on Reddit in the past six months or so about whether I had anymore data. Unfortunately, I stopped updating attendance figures in March or April for three reasons:

1. I got a lot busier. I rarely get a chance to play any more despite the fact that there are quite a few weeklies easily accessible in my local community, so you can imagine updating attendance numbers is very low on my priority list during my free time. When I have free time to devote to Magic, aside from occasionally playing, there are quite a few other projects that have much higher priority.
2. I live in Seattle, where SCG canceled two previously scheduled events and modified a third one before that (the December 2014 Open weekend was supposed to consist of Standard and Legacy Opens). As you can imagine, many players in Seattle were apathetic about SCG even before they recently announced they were withdrawing from the West Coast, especially as we have many great stores in the area. There's no point in wasting so much time analyzing a circuit that is as remote to me as MKM (exception: if I could get full decklists for the Legacy Classics or Opens, I would love to use that for metagame analysis for one of my other projects, but I believe Wizards told SCG to cut it out a while ago).
3. When I began my analysis, SCG had not yet announced their schedule for the second half of 2015. When they released their schedule in March or April for the second half of 2015 despite strong Legacy attendance numbers to that point, it was clear to me that this did not factor into their decisions and I didn't want to waste time on analysis that fell upon deaf ears.

[Barook]

Checking the numbers of the last few Standard Opens, the numbers stagnate around ~420 people, while the Modern Opens put up 1k+ people last week and 815 this weekend.

The Somerset Open had 523 Legacy Players.

Makes you wonder why they still schedule so many Standard events when they're clearly the least participated ones. I guess because Wizards is pushing SCG to do it.

[MGB]

Checking the numbers of the last few Standard Opens, the numbers stagnate around ~420 people, while the Modern Opens put up 1k+ people last week and 815 this weekend.

The Somerset Open had 523 Legacy Players.

Makes you wonder why they still schedule so many Standard events when they're clearly the least participated ones. I guess because Wizards is pushing SCG to do it.

Magic was designed to be played as a non-rotating, constructed game from the start. That is the most enjoyable mode this game has to offer, and I'm not surprised that the masses have voted with their attendance and their money by supporting Modern much more than Standard.

[rufus]

Magic was designed to be played as a non-rotating, constructed game from the start. That is the most enjoyable mode this game has to offer, and I'm not surprised that the masses have voted with their attendance and their money by supporting Modern much more than Standard.

This particular standard format is also very expensive and widely regarded as stale.

[Barook]

Magic was designed to be played as a non-rotating, constructed game from the start. That is the most enjoyable mode this game has to offer, and I'm not surprised that the masses have voted with their attendance and their money by supporting Modern much more than Standard.
It certainly doesn't help that the current Standard is a ridiculous expensive mess of 4 color decks that all look the same.

[Lord Seth]

Magic was designed to be played as a non-rotating, constructed game from the start.Well... actually, no. First, Magic wasn't designed to be Constructed, at least not in the way we think of it now. The idea was people would get some packs, then make a deck from what they opened. Basically Sealed, except you could get more cards by winning them from opponents. "Constructed" as we now consider it, in coming up with a decklist and then getting the cards together to play it, was not how it was designed.

As for the non-rotating, that's not really true either. The original idea was that the expansions would be standalone variations of the game and not meant to be played with each other (though players technically could). Ice Age was actually originally planned to be a new iteration of the game, separate from what came before. This was obviously scrapped and Standard rotation instituted instead. Here's Richard Garfield on the subject:

The intent was to print Magic: The Gathering only once, and that when we started to run out of "The Gathering," we would print Magic: The Gathering—Ice Age, sort of a second Magic edition. Ice Age would have its own card back, and people would play it by itself, though mechanically they could mix it with "The Gathering."

So to claim Magic was designed to be played as a non-rotating, constructed game from the start is really not true. The way it was designed from "the start" wasn't for Standard rotation, but it wasn't for anything resembling Legacy or Modern either.

[Ellomdian]

It certainly doesn't help that the current Standard is a ridiculous expensive mess of 4 color decks that all look the same.

And that there is a single standard card that is (checking...) down to 70$, from 80$ last month. When staple standard cards creep above 40$, casual attendance historically suffers. The Grinders will still play, but transitioning new players to regulars is very difficult. As a result, 'innovation' tends to be just variations on the same theme, and the format is insanely boring to watch. (I hate judging standard right now, why do you ask?)

The reason SCG pushes standard though is that it's the only neigh universal format. While the kinds of people who prefer Vintage and Legacy typically don't play it regularly, it represents both a gateway format for new players and a format that most 'normal' tournament attendees willingly play. It's also the format with the best ground-level support from WOTC.

The irony of 'Eternal' (and it's in quotes because I'm including Modern) is that the formats with the smaller playerbases tend to be the more devoted, willing to travel to a few events if they are available. You can expect a bunch of locals to show up to a Standard GP or Open because they live there, you tend to see a lot of people traveling to Modern and Legacy events because there just aren't many of them.