Unlocking Legacy - Game Losses Are Optional [Archive]

diffy

03-17-2008, 06:07 AM

Linky (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/15596.html)

Players receive penalties all the time at Magic tournaments because of carelessness and laziness. Kevin Binswanger is here to give you advice and step-by-step instructions on tournament operations to let you concentrate on playing Magic without having to worry about an illegal decklist or slow play.

I don't know why this was in the Unlocking Legacy column since it has nothing to do with Legacy in particular but rather with Competative play in general.

On a more general note: can only regulars (Anusien, Bardo, Nightmare, Machinus, Hi-Val) submit articles for the Unlocking Legacy? If not why couldn't we get sourcers to write about their particular pet-deck and then submit it to the column. In that way we would have much more focused articles and newcomers to Legacy would have an overview over the current decks in the Legacy Metagame and how to play (against) them / how they work / what their place in the metagame is etc. For sure it is a lot of work but you can always find volunteers... (see goobafish's article (http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/article.asp?ID=7977) on Ugr Threshold as a refference for what I'm thinking about)

Ewokslayer

03-17-2008, 08:56 AM

On a more general note: can only regulars (Anusien, Bardo, Nightmare, Machinus, Hi-Val) submit articles for the Unlocking Legacy?

Yes.

Though some of them might be willing/able to submit/devote a part of their article to a player talking about their creation "in their own words" or some such.

As for the article, it seems strange that the Unlocking Legacy article would focus on habits for Competitive* players when Legacy players are the least Competitive* players there are.

*Competitive as defined by the REL level of the tournaments they play at.

diffy

03-17-2008, 09:59 AM

Though some of them might be willing/able to submit/devote a part of their article to a player talking about their creation "in their own words" or some such.

I'll second that idea. Articles like this (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/14180.html) give, in my oppinion, a great insight and make for more content. Also it is always nice to have more than one opinion on different topics in each article.

Zach Tartell

03-17-2008, 10:43 AM

I wrote Star City after I finished the second or so primer in the Enchantress thread, asking if they'd be down for sbumissions. They gave me a "hey thanks get the hell out" sort of thing; aparrently they're only looking for solicited arcitles (ie paid authors)(god, I wrote "payed" before I fixed that).

Nightmare

03-17-2008, 10:52 AM

Payed - past tense: to cover with waterproof material, such as tar or asphalt.

I would much rather be paid than payed.

Also, this was a good article, but had very little to do with Legacy. Still, thats fine now and again.

mujadaddy

03-17-2008, 10:55 AM

Anybody else find it funny that they link to the card Warning when referring to an official warning?

goobafish

03-17-2008, 11:26 AM

On a more general note: can only regulars (Anusien, Bardo, Nightmare, Machinus, Hi-Val) submit articles for the Unlocking Legacy?

When I asked them if they would be interested in the article, they didn't even answer. I wouldn't mind this so much if other sites received the same amount of viewers. Brainburst has asked me to continue writing for them, but honestly what is the point of doing so if the site does not see the same amount of viewers? People do not generally write articles to make money, they like getting their ideas and name out there, and that is very hard to do on the sites that will accept submissions because they are not nearly as frequented as SCG.

Bardo

03-17-2008, 12:15 PM

On a more general note: can only regulars (Anusien, Bardo, Nightmare, Machinus, Hi-Val) submit articles for the Unlocking Legacy? I'm not a "regular" writer. I gave Nightmare my slot when I didn't have it in me to write about Magic on a regular basis.

After SCG's change to a column-based site (i.e. not unsolicited submission-based), it's a lot harder to get in if you're a) not writing about a popular topic (i.e. T2/Extended); b) not a recognized "name" (like Rizzo, etc.)

Just looking at the "Previously on StarCity" section at the bottom of their front-page, you can see several article by non-columnists. It is, however, much harder to get an article published as a "nobody" than it was before. And it's doubly hard to get published if you're writing about Legacy.

My next article will run [EDIT] Wednesday on their front page, but after that, if I continue to write about Magic, I'll probably do it for another site.

As for Anusien's article, I haven't read it yet, but I think it's fine to use the slot to talk about other things on occasion.

Tacosnape

03-17-2008, 01:09 PM

Zach Tartell

03-17-2008, 01:23 PM

This was sort of a neat article. It was about as relevant to Legacy as I am to the Peruvian Government, but given that I almost never agree with Anusien's Legacy opinions, that works fine.

Good read.

I don't understand this? What's to disagree with? That his editing process sucks pretty hard? (observant readers will notice that he mentions that pile-shuffling into 7 piles will put the 60th card in the 4th pile twice) That buying new sleeves is a bad thing?

Y'know, usually Anusien's articles are better reads than, say, horticulture textbooks, but this one was okay. I learned some mildly interesting things, and can actually use some of it when I play in the next real tournament I'm at. There's nothing really objectionable in here.

I feel like you're just being negative for the sake of being negative.

mujadaddy

03-17-2008, 01:41 PM

Taco, the article is relevant to ANY tournament, regardless of format. You meant "specific to Legacy" right?

etrigan

03-17-2008, 01:53 PM

I would much rather be paid than payed.

Yes, but would you rather be laid, or layed?

Played or plaid? Your choice.

Nihil Credo

03-17-2008, 01:56 PM

I don't understand this? What's to disagree with? That his editing process sucks pretty hard?
Actually, Taco was saying that he almost always disagrees with Anusien about Legacy issues, while a general article like this one suits him fine.

Zach Tartell

03-17-2008, 01:59 PM

Actually, Taco was saying that he almost always disagrees with Anusien about Legacy issues, while a general article like this one suits him fine.

You win this round, dopplegänger.

Anusien

03-17-2008, 02:28 PM

I'm glad this one went over well. I am actually surprised some of you felt it may not be entirely relevant since it seems to me that Legacy players are among the worst at tournament operations. This is mostly because other players have regular tournaments, and Legacy players don't; it is just a hard transition from MWS to a Grand Prix (which are Competitive Day 1, and Professional Day 2).

I had some Legacy specific things to say on a only sort of related topic, but it would really be doing this topic a disservice by either shortening this or tacking something else on. Besides that the topic is long and already kind of thick.

(observant readers will notice that he mentions that pile-shuffling into 7 piles will put the 60th card in the 4th pile twice)
That's because I wrote it twice :P If I'm not mistaken, I mention it once talking about shuffling/counting your own deck and shuffling/counting your opponent's deck.

Anyway, I'd appreciate more feedback. I'm not likely to do this thing more than once, but I thought something that was distinctly tournament-related would be a good change after all the BR chats.

goobafish

03-17-2008, 02:47 PM

This seems more relevant to Vintage players. As player of both formats, I see many more mistakes made in vintage events, with sloppy decklists, poor shuffling, sideboarding in too many cards, ect. I actually think it is a good article that is helpful to players from begininer to mid-range players. I have had very few opponents who shuffle their sideboard in to their deck before game two, which I always do. Correcting these small errors is very beneficial to players.

AnwarA101

03-17-2008, 03:47 PM

I'm glad this one went over well. I am actually surprised some of you felt it may not be entirely relevant since it seems to me that Legacy players are among the worst at tournament operations. This is mostly because other players have regular tournaments, and Legacy players don't; it is just a hard transition from MWS to a Grand Prix (which are Competitive Day 1, and Professional Day 2).

Do you really go out of your way to bash Legacy players? Do you have data to support your view that "Legacy players are among the worst at tournament operations"? It is a particularly harsh characterization. Goobafish was able to compare his experiences between Vintage and Legacy, but I am curious where your generalized statements come from.

I was thinking this was an okay article despite the fact that it wasn't really about "Unlocking Legacy", but your attitude suggests that not much has changed. You still have this sense that you are teaching Legacy players because they are unskilled and generally poor at this game. I think you do a disservice to your readers when you talk to down to them.

Jaiminho

03-17-2008, 04:45 PM

At my limited tournament experience with Legacy, what Anusien said seems to be true: players that attend only to the Legacy champs don't have nearly the same "tournament behavior" as players that attend to other champs, since they are way more regular and those players can get used to many things you won't see happening outside a casual room, which includes MWS.

I don't see a reason for all this rant I read just above... not like he's bashing anyone, really.

Anusien

03-17-2008, 04:46 PM

Do you really go out of your way to bash Legacy players? Do you have data to support your view that "Legacy players are among the worst at tournament operations"? It is a particularly harsh characterization. Goobafish was able to compare his experiences between Vintage and Legacy, but I am curious where your generalized statements come from.

I was thinking this was an okay article despite the fact that it wasn't really about "Unlocking Legacy", but your attitude suggests that not much has changed. You still have this sense that you are teaching Legacy players because they are unskilled and generally poor at this game. I think you do a disservice to your readers when you talk to down to them.
Personally, I think everyone tends to be less good at tournament operations than they should be or think they are. Legacy tournaments also have the biggest extreme; your general weekly tournaments are REL Regular, and Day 2 of a Legacy Grand Prix is REL Professional. Constructed players also have a lot more tournaments they can attend and get practice at: mostly PTQs but also a lot of GPs and things like the SCG $1k. There is also no Legacy on Magic Online; if Magic Online makes you a bad player like some people suggest (because it reminds you of triggers and such), Magic Workstation makes you worse.

thefreakaccident

03-17-2008, 05:02 PM

Saying that legacy players are generally worse4 in a tournament setting is just plain false and ignorant...

I have very rarely played other formats (vintage online sometimes, extended during season, limited when I have money, standard hardly ever), but I have done consistantly decent in all of those formats, getting in T4 in almost every limited tournament I stay in, going 4-2-1 twice in local ptqs (extended), actually winning a couple online vintage tournaments.

But I am a legacy player at heart, and keep coming back.

Legacy players aren't worse players because they have fewer events to participate in, they are better for it, as they are always able to bring their A game, coming prepared and having to play against others who have also come prepared.

Not to mention, we have the closest community within magic by far.

Jaiminho

03-17-2008, 05:08 PM

His words were not about how well you do on a tournament, but how well you follow the correct way of playing through the game rules and avoid making mistakes that are pointed out on the first page of the book.

hi-val

03-17-2008, 05:35 PM

People who only play Eternal formats are often worse than those who diversify. You'll see this at events. I was and am unreal bad at combat since Eternal doesn't involve it a lot. Even branching into T4 or EDH or 5C helps, since you see a lot of different interactions. Things like Repealing your Mesmeric Fiend, etc.

I'm not gonna say Legacy players are stone awful because I don't think they are. That said, there's a lot of room for improvement with playskill and game operations.

aTn

03-17-2008, 06:07 PM

Do you really go out of your way to bash Legacy players? Do you have data to support your view that "Legacy players are among the worst at tournament operations"? It is a particularly harsh characterization. Goobafish was able to compare his experiences between Vintage and Legacy, but I am curious where your generalized statements come from.

I was thinking this was an okay article despite the fact that it wasn't really about "Unlocking Legacy", but your attitude suggests that not much has changed. You still have this sense that you are teaching Legacy players because they are unskilled and generally poor at this game. I think you do a disservice to your readers when you talk to down to them.

I totally agree with this. Most of the Legacy players I know play other formats (Standard, Extended and some Limited, in season) on a regular basis, i.e. at least once a week. They also playtest a lot in a non-sloppy fashion. So your claim is absolutely not representative of the Legacy players in my area. As was mentioned, it would be interesting to know what you have to back it up...

EDIT: Relatively nice article BTW; I just think it could have been done without going into stereotypes.

I'm not gonna say Legacy players are stone awful because I don't think they are. That said, there's a lot of room for improvement with playskill and game operations.

Agreed.

kirdape3

03-17-2008, 06:14 PM

aTn

03-17-2008, 06:17 PM

I'm pretty sure that the best way to get good at tournaments (specifically, tournament operations) is to, you know, play in them. Since there are fewer Legacy tournaments than there are other types of tournaments, assuming the first premise is true then the idea that Legacy players are less competent at tournament operations follows. Not playing in tournaments, but the operations of doing so. Certainly you don't get the feel of winning the game on a stone bluff without tournaments unless you test extraordinarily viciously.

Granted, but some of us actually play other formats regularly. Then again, come to think of it, I might be a Standard/Legacy player and not a pure Legacy player (if by Legacy player, you mean a player which participates only in Legacy events)...

Bardo

03-17-2008, 07:26 PM

I am actually surprised some of you felt it may not be entirely relevant since it seems to me that Legacy players are among the worst at tournament operations.

Then again, come to think of it, I might be a Standard/Legacy player and not a pure Legacy player (if by Legacy player, you mean a player which participates only in Legacy events)...

I believe Kevin's comment was more directed to tournament players whose primary tournament experience is from Legacy tournaments (which are few and far between at high RELs); not toward Legacy players who also frequently compete in other formats (Block, Standard, etc.).

Zach Tartell

03-17-2008, 07:51 PM

I believe Kevin's comment was more directed to tournament players whose primary tournament experience is from Legacy tournaments (which are few and far between at high RELs); not toward Legacy players who also frequently compete in other formats (Block, Standard, etc.).

I take some stout offense to this, here.

According to the DCI I've played in 35 Sanctioned tournaments. Of them, 29 have been Legacy, 3 limited events, and 3 "composite events" (what does that mean?). I've also played numerous peasant extended, highlander, and other weird events that my local (Oswego) shop has to offer (but I'm pretty sure that those don't count. So, I'm just trying to say that I've played in (exponentially) more legacy events than anything else. Like, a bunch more of them than anything.

So, I'm not a very diverse Magic player. I'm not afraid of people making fun of me for that - most of us only pay real attention to a single format. And that's cool. Mine is Legacy.

I wouldn't say that I'm not a pedestrian, as far as uptight Magic etiquette goes. For instance, I didn't know that, at professional events, it's necessary to shuffle your opponent's deck. That was weird to me. As for the rest of it, though, I think I was pretty well versed in tournament on-goings. In fact, it could be said that, when people say that "Legacy players are terrible players, always," I get ready to serve up a heaping helping of rage. (Get ready folks)

Who are you to tell me that I'm a bad player? That people like me are bad players? I think that's a bold-faced lie. I learned to play Magic largely from my teammate Matt "bigbear102 or something like that" Abold. Yeah. For that double-juiced-in Legacy upbringing. I learned how phases move, how damage works, and what "the stack" is (shit's still pretty confusing). Yeah. My first fifteen or so tournaments were exclusively with Legacy players. I didn't know that there were judges other than Eli Kass for like the first four months of my Magic career. (that's a little hyperbole)

I'm fucking great at playing Magic cards. Like, seriously. I'ma take a moment to toot my own horn. In two weeks I top 8'd three times. To my knowledge nobody else has done that. Seriously. (I'm kind of a big deal) I've won more than half a playset of revised duals (and one very special unlimited Scrubland).

Anyone who's played against me, ever, can tell you that I take such detailed notes that it's a little embarrassing. I am an opponent who tries to add levity to any sort of situation (instead of being some ass who just sits there and slings spells at you - I'm really a pleasure to sit across from). I pile shuffle twice, with intermittent riffle-shuffling while I wait for my opponent to present his deck to me. I Always shuffle my whole sideboard into my deck when boarding, even when at a local. I have a whole bag filled with extra decks to test against, usually 100 un-opened KMC sleeves of the same color that I'm using in the tournament, in case I need to re-sleeve anything, and one of those cube-things full of tiny d6s. My teammates and I make such detailed travel notes that we even put gay jokes about Bryant in them (this seriously happened).

You can't tell me that I, or any of the players that I roll with, are sloppy players, as far as rules go. Like, I know that I've missed adding a Hoofprint token once in a while. Or forget to activate Sylvan Library or something. But Adam's so freaking anal that it's not even fun to play Type 4 or Mental Magic with him sometimes. Matt watches everything like a hawk, Bryant can give you the complete rules text on any card that has ever even been considered in a Storm deck, and Mike Herbig is Mike fucking Herbig.

Don't tell me that I, or people like me, are habitually bad at Magic. Don't even think about it. We're great (our moms will confirm this), and don't even think about telling me differently. At least we play a format where we use sleeves on our cards.

mujadaddy

03-17-2008, 08:23 PM

I'm really a pleasure to sit across from
That's what SHE said!

Anusien

03-17-2008, 09:20 PM

lonelybaritone: I think it's interesting that you have all those other skills and didn't know that it's actually required to shuffle your opponent's deck at Competitive REL and higher. You're also supposed to present your sideboard with your deck when you present (which few players do). I should also point out again that I'm trying to separate tournament skills from playskills; I've seen multiple Top 8 competitors at large events who did not understand why their ratty sleeves were unacceptable in the Top 8 of a large event run at Competitive REL.
Even so, I have to tell you something: you're in the minority. The Source doesn't comprise all of Legacy. Let's look at the tournaments I've been playing at recently for Legacy. They're run at Regular REL, and tournaments like this are the reason for the relaxation of a lot of the rules at Regular REL. An offhanded, "Don't forget to shuffle your Burning Wish back into your deck." at Regular REL used to earn a Disqualification for Cheating - Outside Assistance. How about the players that consistently put their Brainstorms into their graveyard before drawing the cards, or that put the Bridge from Below tokens into play after the Cabal Therapy resolves. And there are a few Sourcers there; although I should point out that those of us whose names you might recognize tend to be the tighter technical players. But you probably don't care about that. Then again at the last Duel for Duals, I believe a player got Disqualified for looking at their sideboard before they played their Wish because they were looking at options. Hanni got a GL while down a game against David Gearheart because he didn't shuffle a Force of Will card back into his library (and Gearheart rightfully called him on it after Hanni presented). Hell at the Grand Prix multiple high quality players forgot to name a card with Meddling Mage. So yes, if every single person in this thread had impeccably good tournament management skills, I'd still write the article because more people than just the population of the Source needed to read it.
But you all don't play perfect. For every Herbig, Bryant Cook and Gearheart, there are a dozen people who have earned slow play penalties for playing combo decks and not knowing how to make all the plays. I've seen multiple people think that they got a certain amount of time guaranteed to make plays, or that you get extra time to think based on how difficult the matchup is or whether they lose that game. In fact I saw a player almost get a game loss from accumulated Slow Play warnings in the finals of a PTQ.

So yeah. Some of you are good at tournament operations all the time, and all of you are good at tournament operations some of the time. But everyone isn't good all the time, so I felt like this article needed to be written. Giving out game losses sucks, so anything I can (legally) do in order to do it less...

Artowis

03-17-2008, 11:31 PM

On an individual post note: You may not want to continually project yourselves as the entire Legacy community, because there are plenty of donks in every format. It's simply in the Eternal formats they tend to stand out more due to the size of the overall player pool.

As Rian correctly pointed out:

Since there are fewer Legacy tournaments than there are other types of tournaments, assuming the first premise is true then the idea that Legacy players are less competent at tournament operations follows. Not playing in tournaments, but the operations of doing so.

AnwarA101

03-17-2008, 11:33 PM

Personally, I think everyone tends to be less good at tournament operations than they should be or think they are. Legacy tournaments also have the biggest extreme; your general weekly tournaments are REL Regular, and Day 2 of a Legacy Grand Prix is REL Professional. Constructed players also have a lot more tournaments they can attend and get practice at: mostly PTQs but also a lot of GPs and things like the SCG $1k. There is also no Legacy on Magic Online; if Magic Online makes you a bad player like some people suggest (because it reminds you of triggers and such), Magic Workstation makes you worse.

You went out of your way to state clearly that you believe Legacy players are some of the worst at tournament operations. You now want to claim that every player could be better at tournament operations. This is obvious. Everyone could be a better driver and there would be less accidents, but that isn't exactly a revelation. You went out of your way to denigrate a group of people. I called you on it and since you can't refute it, you opt to confuse the issue by claiming everyone could be better at tournament operations. Why not simply admit that your first statement was overly broad and could easily be incorrect as you have little to no proof that this is the case? Is it that hard to admit you were wrong?

Anusien

03-18-2008, 12:38 AM

AnwarA101: Even if everything you were saying was true, why is it relevant? It doesn't make the article any more or less true. Why don't you just make criticism or suggestions about the article? You don't like me. That's fine. You want to point out bad things you think I do so other people don't like me. I think people are pretty much made up their mind about me, and I don't mind if people don't like me. I'm unhappy about the way you're derailing the thread about a particular sentence I may or may not have said that only relates in background information to tournaments.

And as for my statement, based on my experience both as a player at local tournaments and Duel for Duals, but also a judge, Legacy players do tend to have some of the worst operations skills. I've said earlier why I think that is, but to reiterate: A) Testing on MWS instead of Magic Online, which enforces Magic conventions. B) More casual local tournaments with a relaxed atmosphere that doesn't force players to play tight. C) The major tournaments are all at Competitive or even Professional REL without regular access to lower REL tournaments. D) The large Legacy tournaments are run extremely sharply; good judges will be more able to enforce things that players at local tournaments aren't used to caring about, like Slow Play or Tardiness. E) Prereleases. I see a lot of dedicated Legacy players that only play at PR (the laxest in enforcement of all touranments) and major Legacy events; that's quite a jump. F) The casual nature of a lot of the players.

Basically, a lot of Legacy players play very casually in their tournaments, even when they are playing in tournaments. Which makes sense; it's easy to earn a reputation as a jackass for being a "stickler" for the rules at a weekly Legacy tournament for store credit. And you're playtesting for fun as much as for events, so you're laxer about things like take backs, slow play and what not. So you go to something like a Duel for Duals or a Grand Prix and all of a sudden things are different. Constructed players have regular PTQs and things like the SCG $1k.

AnwarA101

03-18-2008, 01:00 AM

AnwarA101: Even if everything you were saying was true, why is it relevant? It doesn't make the article any more or less true. Why don't you just make criticism or suggestions about the article? You don't like me. That's fine. You want to point out bad things you think I do so other people don't like me. I think people are pretty much made up their mind about me, and I don't mind if people don't like me. I'm unhappy about the way you're derailing the thread about a particular sentence I may or may not have said that only relates in background information to tournaments.

Whether I like you or not is not relevant to the conversation and I think you know that. Nothing I said was about you personally. I don't particularly care whether people like you or not. But I do want to point out where I think your statements don't make sense. If my post is derailing your thread, then I can get out of the way. I don't feel that you take any criticism seriously anyway and so its serves little purpose to disagree with you.

And as for my statement, based on my experience both as a player at local tournaments and Duel for Duals, but also a judge, Legacy players do tend to have some of the worst operations skills. I've said earlier why I think that is, but to reiterate: A) Testing on MWS instead of Magic Online, which enforces Magic conventions. B) More casual local tournaments with a relaxed atmosphere that doesn't force players to play tight. C) The major tournaments are all at Competitive or even Professional REL without regular access to lower REL tournaments. D) The large Legacy tournaments are run extremely sharply; good judges will be more able to enforce things that players at local tournaments aren't used to caring about, like Slow Play or Tardiness. E) Prereleases. I see a lot of dedicated Legacy players that only play at PR (the laxest in enforcement of all touranments) and major Legacy events; that's quite a jump. F) The casual nature of a lot of the players.

Basically, a lot of Legacy players play very casually in their tournaments, even when they are playing in tournaments. Which makes sense; it's easy to earn a reputation as a jackass for being a "stickler" for the rules at a weekly Legacy tournament for store credit. And you're playtesting for fun as much as for events, so you're laxer about things like take backs, slow play and what not. So you go to something like a Duel for Duals or a Grand Prix and all of a sudden things are different. Constructed players have regular PTQs and things like the SCG $1k.

Are you really comparing local Legacy tournaments to PTQs? Does that even make sense? Ofcourse a local Legacy tournament will feel casual compared to a $25 dollar PTQ. How could it not be? But I think the bigger Legacy events carry a competitive atmosphere in that people have spent a good deal of money and often time traveling to these events. To call them casual is nothing short of an insult.

Bardo

03-18-2008, 12:03 PM

I'm not going to get into anything above me here, but I read Kevin's article this morning and I really liked it. Well done.

Kevin - Tonally, your articles are all over the place. I realize you're trying to find your voice, but I recommend staying away from the "Patriarchal Father" perspective who has all of this accumulated wisdom to share. The safest approach is to assume that your audience is intelligent and educated, because they are. Though for this article, your tone was fine, since you were speaking as a judge, and not a "fellow-player," per se. And man, I know that last sentence is going to be misinterpreted.

Regardless, good article.

Edit - Operationally, I've found the "two box" approach has really helped me out in tournaments. I keep one deckbox for the maindeck, and one for the sideboard. For games 2/3, all of the cards I take out of the maindeck for sideboard cards are moved to the "maindeck box." Sideboard cards obviously come out of the "sideboard box." This way, when I'm de-sideboarding between matches, I know exactly how many cards I need to take out/in, since the sideboard box will always contain 15 - [cards in the maindeck] and the maindeck box has all of the cards I need to add back in.

Nightmare

03-18-2008, 12:22 PM

Edit - Operationally, I've found the "two box" approach has really helped me out in tournaments. I keep one deckbox for the maindeck, and one for the sideboard. For games 2/3, all of the cards I take out of the maindeck for sideboard cards are moved to the "maindeck box." Sideboard cards obviously come out of the "sideboard box." This way, when I'm de-sideboarding between matches, I know exactly how many cards I need to take out/in, since the sideboard box will always contain 15 - [cards in the maindeck] and the maindeck box has all of the cards I need to add back in.

The same thing can be accomplished by using a divider in your deck box. I keep my boarded out cards on the MD side of the separator, and the SB cards on the other. This functions well for Wishes, also.

Tacosnape

03-18-2008, 12:38 PM

The same thing can be accomplished by using a divider in your deck box. I keep my boarded out cards on the MD side of the separator, and the SB cards on the other. This functions well for Wishes, also.

Alternately, you can buy one of those giant lit-up signs from Sam's or Costco and make it say "My Sideboard!" in bright and annoying red dot lights. Then just set some cards underneath and some on top. I've always wanted to do this.

...Yes, I know. I'm easily amused. Shut up.

Lego

03-18-2008, 12:55 PM

I'm not sure if I can do so while avoiding being flamed to death, but I have to support Anusien a bit here. From a Judge's perspective, in my personal experience I have found that dedicated Legacy players (those who get all or most of their organized play from Legacy events) are, overall, sloppier than Extended/Standard players. Dedicated Limited players seem to be the best of all. There are many possible reasons for this, and Anusien has listed several good ones, but I think the biggest one is one that hasn't been mentioned: there's never $30,000 on the line in Legacy. There are no plane tickets up for grabs. I think mostly because of the payouts, Legacy tournaments are much more casual. I'm not making a judgment about that, it's simply what I've observed.

Nihil Credo

03-18-2008, 12:57 PM

Anusien

03-18-2008, 01:25 PM

The problem with the two-box approach is that the opponent knows how many cards you've sided in. By using a divider in the same box, at least you can hide this to some degree, depending on which length you go to in obfuscating your movements.
This is the concern, especially because at higher level events it is common for your opponent to count your sideboard between games. You may also run into issues giving up extra information when you have to flip X number of the cards around such that they can be counted face down. You could be all tricky and give out a fake count, but I think the advantage gained is marginal relative to the difficulty/potential problems. 15 in, 15 out is easier and just as good in my opinion.

TheAardvark

03-18-2008, 01:30 PM

The problem with the two-box approach is that the opponent knows how many cards you've sided in. By using a divider in the same box, at least you can hide this to some degree, depending on which length you go to in obfuscating your movements.

You can also do as Herr Caplan mentioned and shuffle your sideboard into your deck and then remove 15 cards.

Just remember the rule that almost no one seems to follow: 3 minutes to sideboard and present.

Bardo

03-18-2008, 01:58 PM

The same thing can be accomplished by using a divider in your deck box. I keep my boarded out cards on the MD side of the separator, and the SB cards on the other. This functions well for Wishes, also.

I've used the divider approach too, using a divider I got in an old pack of Yanoman Gunmetal sleeves (man, I miss things--the dividers and the sleeves). It's still easy to mix up what's your board and what you're removing from the MD if you're using one box.

The two-box approach is a lot easier from an operational-management standpoint, and if your head is pretty beat up from the day (from gaming for hours on end, plus recreation, libations, etc.)

The problem with the two-box approach is that the opponent knows how many cards you've sided in. By using a divider in the same box, at least you can hide this to some degree, depending on which length you go to in obfuscating your movements.

It's never been a problem, since both box are going to be closed. And if my opponent has x-ray vision that can see through the deck box, knowing how many cards I've sided in/out is really the least of my worries.

goobafish

03-18-2008, 02:02 PM

I've used the divider approach too, using a divider I got in an old pack of Yanoman Gunmetal sleeves (man, I miss things--the dividers and the sleeves). I

The new Yanoman 75s have the divider too. I use them for all my decks, it is awesome for avoiding confusion.

Nihil Credo

03-18-2008, 02:12 PM

It's never been a problem, since both box are going to be closed. And if my opponent has x-ray vision that can see through the deck box, knowing how many cards I've sided in/out is really the least of my worries.

If I understand this correctly, your procedure to bring in X cards is as follows:

1) Take 15 cards out of SB box. Shuffle them in the deck.
2) Take 15-X cards out of the 75. Put them in the SB box.
3) Take X cards out of the remaining 60+X. Put them in the MD box.
4) Shuffle your deck and present it.

While performing steps 2 and 3, the opponent will be able to see how many cards you take out, or at least get a rough estimation. This can be extremely relevant: if I'm a Goblins player and I see you SB 2-3 cards, I'll play very differently postside than if I had seen you bring in eight.

aTn

03-18-2008, 02:59 PM

Anusien said:

I believe a player got Disqualified for looking at their sideboard before they played their Wish because they were looking at options.

I guess it wasn't legal when that tournament occured. It has been for a while now:

Players may look at their sideboards during a game only if the sideboard remains distinguishable from other cards. If a player is resolving a spell or effect that refers to “choosing a card from outside the game,” the player may look at his or her sideboard. (See section 103).

Anusien

03-18-2008, 03:07 PM

I guess it wasn't legal when that tournament occured. It has been for a while now:
Yep. In fact at the tournament in question, the change had been official for a few days, but would not go into effect for another week or two. Gold old "Announcement on the 1st, Comes into Play on the 20th".

It's never been a problem, since both box are going to be closed. And if my opponent has x-ray vision that can see through the deck box, knowing how many cards I've sided in/out is really the least of my worries.
"Can I count your sideboard face down please?" Unless you're incredibly slick, you're going to either have to present both boxes or mash them together and give me a look at how many cards you sided in. This is why I'm hesitant to use the "both sides of the divider" maindeck/sideboard move. Your idea is probably fine if you're worried about getting tired; I just try and memorize the picture of what my sideboard looks and desideboard and return it to the same order. That way I'll notice if it looks wrong.
In a minor point, I'm still trying to find a way to desideboard that doesn't show my entire sideboard to the spectators behind me. There probably isn't one.

Nightmare

03-18-2008, 03:17 PM

I just try and memorize the picture of what my sideboard looks and desideboard and return it to the same order. That way I'll notice if it looks wrong.This is a good idea anyway.

In a minor point, I'm still trying to find a way to desideboard that doesn't show my entire sideboard to the spectators behind me. There probably isn't one."Hi, could you guys not stand behind me while I'm sideboarding please? It's distracting. Thanks guys!"

Problem solved.

Nihil Credo

03-18-2008, 03:21 PM

Also: T-Shit with goatse/tubgirl/lemonparty/Michael Jackson on the back.

aTn

03-18-2008, 03:25 PM

In a minor point, I'm still trying to find a way to desideboard that doesn't show my entire sideboard to the spectators behind me. There probably isn't one.

I don't know if the following answers partially your question, but Guillaume Wafo-Tappa once asked me not to stand behind him while I was watching his match and he was sideboarding. I could understand that and I didn't argue, but I'm wondering if there's a rule concerning this (something concerning spectator conduct). EDIT: I'm not mentioning this example to show off... or maybe a little ;), but mostly because it was at a high REL event.

Bardo

03-18-2008, 03:33 PM

1) Take 15 cards out of SB box. Shuffle them in the deck.
2) Take 15-X cards out of the 75. Put them in the SB box.
3) Take X cards out of the remaining 60+X. Put them in the MD box.
4) Shuffle your deck and present it.

Nah.

1) Take ~3-8 weak/mild-performing cards out of the maindeck and put them in the empty "maindeck box." (Doing so carefully, i.e not revealing how many cards are involved.)
2) Add in the same number of cards from the "sideboard box"
3) If I feel like being tricky, I may add/remove additional cards to throw off my opponent off (most likely if I'm only bringing in 1-2 cards)
4) Shuffle the hell out of my deck.
5) Present the deck.

"Can I count your sideboard face down please?" Unless you're incredibly slick, you're going to either have to present both boxes or mash them together and give me a look at how many cards you sided in.

I'm not as slick as I think I am, but I could reasonably pull this off without giving away any information.

Dilettante

03-18-2008, 04:57 PM

Sometimes, I love to... give information. For example, when you sideboard in 8 silver bullets... and 7 of the cards require one form of removal and the 8th requires a different type... and you flash the 8th with a drop...

Of course, if one is familiar with the ruse, you turn it into the iocaine powder problem... Ah, the joys of psychology...

Phantom

03-18-2008, 06:05 PM

I found this article, and the discussion here, pretty damn informative.

Thanks.

Anusien

03-19-2008, 04:36 PM

I don't know if the following answers partially your question, but Guillaume Wafo-Tappa once asked me not to stand behind him while I was watching his match and he was sideboarding. I could understand that and I didn't argue, but I'm wondering if there's a rule concerning this (something concerning spectator conduct). EDIT: I'm not mentioning this example to show off... or maybe a little ;), but mostly because it was at a high REL event.
Sort of. The player can ask the spectator to move. If the spectator doesn't want to, they can call the Judge, and ultimately it's up to the Head Judge. However, scouting is considered perfectly legal, so "I don't want the spectator to see my sideboarding plans" is probably not a valid reason.

I thought it was a really great idea, but if you say "Move please" and they say "No", unless you lie to the judge about why you want them to move (not a good idea), it'll probably not happen.

Nihil Credo

03-19-2008, 05:01 PM

Lego

03-20-2008, 11:09 AM

If you have a really secret SB tech that you don't want anyone else to see unless unavoidable (i.e. unless you draw and play it during the games), I suppose you could just keep it under the table / under a coat / drop a ninja smoke bomb while putting it in the deck. If your opponent gets (rightfully) suspicious of shenanigans, offer to have your deck checked to attest your honesty.

One of the best ways I've found to do this is to take your entire sideboard and throw it into your deck without looking at it or showing it to the players behind you. Then it's much easier to hide the cards that you are taking out. And if you're short like me, you can hold the deck above you, facing the table, and you'll be the only one low enough to see it :wink:

Keeping your cards under the table is a no-no. I would never recommend doing it.

As for asking the judge to have players move away from the match, he'll probably only do it if you have a legitimate concern. Like you think the guy behind you is sharing your sideboarding strategy with your opponent.